A Guide to Applying for Funding for

Research, Travel, and Language Study

for Linguistics Graduate Students


























Prepared in Spring 2008 by Lisa Bonnici, under the supervision of Dr. Lenora A. Timm
University of California, Davis Department of Linguistics

Table of Contents

Objective ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Suggested timeline for applying for dissertation funding ...................................................................................... 4
Selected List of Fellowships and Grants ......................................................................................................................... 5
UC Davis Travel Grants ........................................................................................................................................................ 5
Awards for Foreign Language Study ............................................................................................................................... 6
Pre-Dissertation Awards ..................................................................................................................................................... 6
Dissertation Fellowships ..................................................................................................................................................... 8
Postdoctoral Fellowships ................................................................................................................................................. 11
Additional UC Davis Research Awards ......................................................................................................................... 12
General Non-UC Davis Awards ....................................................................................................................................... 13
Tips on writing grant proposals (and other research proposals) ..................................................................... 14
Resources for grant writing.......................................................................................................................................... 17
UC Davis Resources for grant preparation ............................................................................................................. 17
Books ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 17
Websites ............................................................................................................................................................................... 17
Sample Proposals .............................................................................................................................................................. 18
Funding Budget Preparation Guide ............................................................................................................................... 19
General Tips for Budget Preparation........................................................................................................................ 19
Components of Budget ................................................................................................................................................... 20
Appendix A: Successful Funding Proposals from UC Davis students ............................................................... 21
SLAI Mini-Grant Proposal: Ann Kelleher ................................................................................................................ 21
SLAI Mini-Grant Proposal: Yuriko Miyamoto Caltabiano ................................................................................ 23
Washington Program Graduate Fellowship: Tammy Gales ............................................................................ 25
National Science Foundation Dissertation Research Improvement Grant: Lisa Bonnici.................... 27
Chancellors Teaching Fellowship: Paul McPherron .......................................................................................... 54
Chancellors Teaching Fellowship: Ann Kelleher ................................................................................................ 57
UC Washington Program, Graduate Summer Fellowship: Ann Kelleher ................................................... 60



Objective
The objective of this report is to provide detailed information about the process of applying
for grants, research awards, and fellowships for linguistic research of all types. It includes a list of
pre-dissertation, travel, language study, dissertation, postdoctoral, and general UC awards and
funding organizations. A timeline for dissertation funding is provided to aid you in your planning
when considering dissertation funding opportunities. Literature and references for grant and budget
proposal preparation are also included. A very useful component of this report is a set of successful
proposals for various awards, including successful award applications from two prestigious
dissertation funding sourcesthe National Science Foundation and the Wenner-Gren Foundation.
To many, applying and receiving funding is an arduous but necessary process. During this
era of budget crisis, government funding for education and research is on the decline, and graduate
programs are encouraging students to seek outside funding. Besides potentially securing you
research funds, grant preparation has the added benefit of forcing you to meet deadlines in your
proposal preparation process, to frame your research for different audiences, to whittle down your
writing to meet page length requirements, and to refine your research goals. Being a successful grant
writer is also very important in the current job market. When applying for academic jobs, evidence
of successful grants will work in your favor.
Applying for grants is one aspect of an academic career and graduate school is the time to
get started in your quest for research monies. It need not be an arduous process, but planning is
vital. Good luck!
Suggested timelin

Award funding will likely cover research expenses begininning during this period.
Congratulate yourself for submitting funding applications! Then promptly forget about your applications for a while.
Most dissertation funding applications are due during this
period.
Submit drafts of your funding applications to your advisor and other mentors for their feedback. This will aid them in
writing a strong letter of recommendation for you.
Create or update your CV.
Begin drafting all components
Discuss your options with your advisor and decide which fellowships you plan to apply for.
imeline for applying for dissertation funding
June - September
Award funding will likely cover research expenses begininning during this period.
April
Funding announcements begin to be made.
February
Congratulate yourself for submitting funding applications! Then promptly forget about your applications for a while.
October- February
Most dissertation funding applications are due during this Send emails verifying that your application and letters of
recommendation have been received.
September
Submit drafts of your funding applications to your advisor and other mentors for their feedback. This will aid them in
writing a strong letter of recommendation for you.
Summer
Begin drafting all components
of applications.
Contact funding agencies with
your questions.
Join
Spring
Begin researching funding opportunities.
Discuss your options with your advisor and decide which fellowships you plan to apply for.
dissertation funding

Award funding will likely cover research expenses begininning during this period.
Congratulate yourself for submitting funding applications! Then promptly forget about your applications for a while.
Send emails verifying that your application and letters of
recommendation have been received.
Submit drafts of your funding applications to your advisor and other mentors for their feedback. This will aid them in
Join organizations which offer
funding you plan to apply for
Discuss your options with your advisor and decide which fellowships you plan to apply for.
Selected List of Fellowships and Grants
UC Davis Travel Grants
Description: Presenting at conferences is an important aspect of your graduate study allowing
you to network with fellow linguists, present and receive feedback on your work, and generally
to socialize you into life as an academic. A number of awards are available for travel to
conferences. Many require that you present your work in order to be eligible. Most awards are
given on a reimbursement basis. Save all your original receipts for flights, lodging, conference
fees, gas, local transportation, even meals. Alongside the awards listed here, check to see if the
specific conference you are attending offers any travel grants.
Consortium for Women and Research Travel Award: This award provides funds for conference
travel to graduate students whose research matches the goals of the Consortium. Awards vary
in amount from $600 for domestic travel to $800 for international travel. Applications for
travel between December 15 of the previous year and June 30 of the current year are due in
October. Applications for travel between May 1 and December 14 of the same year are due
in March.
Department of Linguistics: The Department of Linguistics may make funds available for the
reimbursement of conference travel expenses to graduate students. Check with the
Department Chair, Professor Patrick OFarrell. Save your receipts.
Graduate Student Association Travel Award: This award is intended for students attending
either professional meetings or any professional development meetings that deal with topics
affecting graduate students' future goals (e.g. leadership, community service). Presentation of
original scholarly work at the meeting is not required, but does increase your chances for
funding. Awards range from $50-$500 and are contingent on submission of receipts.
Applications are due in May for travel between January 1 and December 1 of the same year,
and in January for travel between July of the previous year and June of the following year.
Graduate Studies Travel Award: This award is intended for travel to conferences in or outside
of the U.S. Graduate students nearing the completion of their studies, who have not yet
received the award, and who are presenting at a conference are eligible. Students must have a
minimum GPA of 3.0. Applicants submit their applications to their graduate program chair.
Awards are given as reimbursements and thus require submission of receipts. Awards range
from $500 for domestic travel to $1,000 for international travel. Applications for travel during
January 1 through December 31 are due by March 15. Applications for travel during July 1
(current calendar year) through June 30 (following calendar year) are due to the graduate
programs by October 15.
Steven G. Lapointe Award: This is an endowed award through the Department of Linguistics in
honor of Steven Lapointe, a former faculty member who passed away in 1992. A call for
proposals is sent to all graduate students during the Winter quarter of each year. The purpose
of the award is to recognize high academic promise and accomplishment by granting $500 to a
graduate student who has presented or will present at a professional conference a paper based
on original research that a faculty award committee judges to be of outstanding quality.
Awards for Foreign Language Study
Foreign Language and Area Studies (FLAS) Fellowship: The purpose of this award is to provide
support for extensive language study with language acquisition as the central goal. This award
provides summer or academic year support for language study through UC Berkeley. Awardees
who are non-UC Berkeley students are expected to complete their language study at UC
Berkeley. The award covers registration fees and a stipend. Applications are due in January.
National Security Education Program (NSEP) David L. Boren Graduate Fellowship: This award
provides from one semester to two years of funding for language and area studies, of languages
and cultures deemed critical to U.S. national security to individuals who are interested in
working in the federal government. Post-Ph.D. service obligations are attached to this award.
Applicants must be U.S. citizens and enrolled in or applying to a graduate program. Awards are
made for international and domestic study up to $30,000. Applications are due late January.
U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Critical Language
Scholarship: This award provides support for summer intensive language study in one of the
following critical languages: Arabic, Bangla/Bengali, Hindi, Punjabi, Turkish, Urdu, Chinese,
Korean, Persian and Russian. This award is intended to expand the number of Americans
studying and mastering critical need foreign languages. Applicants must be U.S. citizens and
Master's and Ph.D. students, or recent graduates. The award provides funding for beginning,
intermediate and advanced level summer language programs at American Overseas Research
Centers. Recipients are expected to continue their language study beyond the scholarship
period and later apply their critical language skills in their professional careers. The award
includes travel to the program location, pre-departure orientation costs, applicable visa fees,
room, board, travel within country and all entrance fees for program activities. Applications are
due in late January.
Pre-Dissertation Awards
Description: While you may think that research funding is not something to consider applying
for until you are about to embark on your dissertation research, think again. A number of pre-
dissertation awards are available to linguistics graduate students. These are sometimes called
exploratory research awards. Some of these awards are only available to recent
undergraduates who have not yet begun graduate school. Other pre-dissertation awards are
available to students in their first years of graduate study.
The Council for European Studies Fellowship Program: This award is intended for students with
research focused on Europe who are preparing to undertake their first major research project
in Europe. The award provides students with three months of support of up to $4,000 for
research exploration in Europe, additional travel support for participation in a CES conference,
and publication of a report in the CES journal. Applications are due February 1 for fellowships
available to begin immediately.
Jacob K. Javits Fellowship Program: This program provides fellowships to students on the basis
of superior academic ability to undertake study in the fields of arts, humanities, and social
sciences. This award provides up to 48 months of support to U.S. citizens, nationals, permanent
residents, or citizens of any one of the Freely Associated States who will pursue a doctoral or
masters degree. Applicants must be undergraduates who are about to enter graduate school
or graduate students who have not yet completed their first year of graduate school. The award
includes an institutional payment ($12, 627 in 2007) and a maximum stipend of $30,000.
Applications are due in October. Awards received are for the following fiscal year.
The Jack Kent Cooke Foundation Graduate Scholarship Program: This award provides support to
recent undergraduate degree recipients who will begin a graduate degree in the fall after award
application submission. Interested applicants must be nominated by their undergraduate
institution representative, who can be found on the foundation website. This award covers a
portion of educational expenses, including tuition, living expenses, fees, and books. The
amount varies by student and is renewable for up to six years. Applications are due mid-
March.
Lewis and Clark Fund for Exploration and Field Research: This award supports exploratory field
studies for the collection of specimens and data and to provide the imaginative stimulus that
accompanies direct observation. Doctoral students in Linguistics are eligible to apply. The
award provides up to $5,000 of support. Applications are due in mid-February.
Microsoft Graduate Fellowship: This award is intended for computer science Ph.D. students,
but those involved in computational linguistic research may wish to apply. Applicants must be
nominated by their department chair. This award provides two years of support, preferably to
second or third year Ph.D students, and includes 100% payment of tuition and fees, an annual
stipend ($20,000 in 2007), and a conference travel allowance. Applications are due in early
October.
National Academies Ford Diversity Predoctoral Fellowship: This award provides three years of
support to U.S. citizens or nationals pursuing a Ph.D. The objective of this award is to support
students who are committed to achieving excellence in college and university teaching, with a
particular emphasis on students of ethnic and racial backgrounds traditionally
underrepresented within university faculties, especially: Alaska Natives (Eskimo/Aleut);
Black/African-Americans; Mexican Americans / Chicanas/Chicanos; Native American Indians;
Native Pacific Islanders (Polynesian/ Micronesian); Puerto Ricans. The awardee receives an
annual stipend of $20,000. Applications are due November 15. Announcement of Awards:
April
National Science Foundations Graduate Research Fellowship Program: This program provides
three years of support for graduate students in the early stages of their graduate study. The
goal of the program is to ensure the vitality of the human resource base of science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics in the United States and to reinforce its diversity.
Applicants must be U.S. citizens or nationals. Applications are due in November.
Paul and Daisy Soros Fellowship for New Americans: This award is available to New Americans
pursuing graduate and professional degrees. New American is defined as a resident alien,
i.e., a Green Card holder; a resident who has been naturalized as a U.S. citizen or is the child of
two parents who are both naturalized citizens. Undergraduate applicants about to enter
graduate school are preferred but graduate students in their first or second years of study are
also considered. This award includes one-half the tuition cost of the U.S. graduate program and
a yearly maintenance grant of $20,000. Applications are due November 1. Announcement of
Awards: February for graduate study beginning the following September.
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada: This award is available to Canadian
students applying to or enrolled in a Ph.D. program in humanities or social sciences in
universities both in and outside of Canada. Applicants must be citizens or permanent residents
of Canada, have completed or are about to complete a Master's degree or a Bachelor's degree
in the humanities or social sciences, or are already pursuing a Ph.D. or equivalent or a
combined M.A./Ph.D. This award provides up to four years of support ranging from $20,000 to
$35,000 per annum. Applications are due November 15.
Dissertation Fellowships
Description: Applying for dissertation funding takes a lot of time. Applications are long and
complicated and generally include an extensive research proposal, a detailed budget, letters of
recommendation, transcripts, curriculum vitae, and more. IRB approval is generally required by
the time the research will begin, but some awards require IRB approval upon applying for
funds. Funding applications begin to be due in the Fall, for funding which generally begins the
following Summer or Fall. Thus, plan accordingly. If you want funding in your fourth year of
graduate school, you need to apply early in your third year.
American Anthropological Association (AAA) Minority Dissertation Writing Fellowship: This
award is intended for minority doctoral candidates in anthropology to aid completion of the
dissertation. Applicants must be members of an ethnic minority, a U.S. citizen, and a member
of AAA. The award is in the amount of $10,000. Applications are due on February 15.
American Association of University Women (AAUW) American Dissertation Fellowship: This
award supports women completing doctoral degrees. Applicants are evaluated on the basis of
scholarly excellence, teaching experience, and active commitment to helping women and girls
through service in their communities, professions, or fields of research. Applicants must be U.S.
citizens or permanent residents and women. This award provides up to $20,000 for
dissertation work. Applications are due in mid-November of each year for fellowships
beginning the following July.
American Council of Learned Societies Dissertation Fellowship in Southeast European Studies:
This award is intended for dissertation research focusing on Southeastern Europe. Applicants
apply for one of three categories of awards: developmental, research, or writing. Awardees
receive up to $17,000 of support. Applications are due in mid-November.
American Institute of Indian Studies Junior Research Fellowship: This award provides support
for graduate students who wish to pursue their dissertation research in India. This award funds
recipients for up to eleven months. Applicants receive a maintenance stipend of Rs 29,400 per
month, and research and travel funds totaling Rs 12,600 per month. Applications are due July
1.
Charlotte W. Newcombe Doctoral Dissertation Fellowship: This award provides support for
research on ethical or religious values in all fields of the humanities and social sciences. This
award is generally intended for Ph.D. candidates who are in the dissertation writing phase, and
provides twelve months of support in the amount of $23,000 maximum. Applications are due
in early November.
Maurice and Marilyn Cohen Fund Doctoral Dissertation Fellowship: This award from the
Foundation for Jewish Culture provides support for one academic year, for doctoral candidates
in the final stages of completing a dissertation, typically in the fifth year of study. Applicants
must have completed all doctoral requirements except the dissertation, and should show
evidence of being able to complete the dissertation within the fellowship year. The award
provides $16,000-$20,000 of support. Applications are due in late November for the following
academic year.
Fulbright-Hays Doctoral Dissertation Research Abroad: This program provides grants to
colleges and universities to fund individual doctoral students who conduct research abroad in
modern foreign languages and area studies. Applicants must apply through their university
(contact UC Davis Office of Research for more information). This award includes travel and
living expenses for a period of six to twelve months. Projects focusing on Western Europe are
not supported. Applications are due in early-November.
The John Hope Franklin Dissertation Fellowship: This award is intended for minority students or
other students who are committed to the eradication of racial disparities and the
underrepresentation of minorities in academic positions. Applicants should be pursuing
dissertation topics which would benefit greatly from use of the American Philosophical Society
Library in Philadelphia, including American Indian linguistics. This award provides one year of
support in the amount of $30,000 to doctoral students. Awardees are required to spend a
minimum of three months in Philadelphia. Applications are due April 1.
The Josephine de Krmn Fellowship Trust: This award is intended to support and recognize
Ph.D. students who will defend their dissertation in the academic year in which the award is
received. The award is intended for applicants whose scholastic goals match that of de Krmn.
The award provides $20,000 of support. Applications are due in late January.
The Mabelle McLeod Lewis Memorial Fund: This award provides grants to advanced doctoral
candidates at Northern California universities conducting research in the humanistic disciplines.
This award includes a one-year stipend and payment of tuition fees. Applications are made
available at the Office of Graduate Studies in Mrak Hall. Contact mmcleodlewis@yahoo.com or
the Executive Secretary at 408-293-9952 for information. Applications are due in mid-January.
Mellon/American Council of Learned Societies Dissertation Completion Fellowship: This award
provides one year of support for graduate students in the humanities and related social
sciences in the last year of Ph.D. dissertation writing. This award includes a $25,000 stipend
plus an additional stipend for research and university fees. Applications are due in mid-
November of each year for fellowships beginning the following summer.
Mellon Fellowship for Dissertation Research in Original Sources: This award provides up to one
year of support to advanced doctoral students at American universities in the humanities or
related fields, who are using original sources in their research. Research can be carried out at
multiple sites both in the U.S. and abroad. The award provides up to $20,000 of support.
Applications are due in late November of each year for fellowships beginning from June to
September.
National Academies Ford Diversity Dissertation Fellowship: This award provides one year of
support to doctoral students who are U.S. citizens or nationals, with particular consideration of
applicants from the following ethnic and racial backgrounds: Alaska Natives (Eskimo or Aleut);
Black/African Americans; Mexican Americans/ Chicanas/ Chicanos; Native American Indians;
Native Pacific Islanders (Polynesian/Micronesian); Puerto Ricans. This award is intended to fund
students who are committed to using diversity in their research and teaching. Applications are
due in late November.
National Science Foundation (NSF) Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant: This dissertation
award supports scientific research of all types which focuses on human language as an object of
investigation. The award amount varies and does not exceed $12,000. The award application
has multiple components, including a 15-page proposal. Applications are reviewed and
submitted by the UC Davis Office of Research, which also has its own set of forms and required
signatures. Applications are due to NSF on January 15
th
and July 15
th
, however, it is necessary
to allow additional time for review by UC Davis Office of Research.
The Phi Beta Kappa Mary Isabel Sibley Fellowship: This award is intended for women studying
Greek language, literature, history, or archaeology, or French language or literature. Applicants
must be unmarried women between the age of 25 and 35 who are in the dissertation phase.
Applicants need not be Phi Beta Kappa members. The award includes a stipend of up to
$20,000. Applications are due in mid-January.
Phillips Fund Grant for Native American Research: This award is intended for research in Native
American linguistics, ethnohistory, and the history of studies of Native Americans in the
continental United States and Canada. Applicants may be graduate students undertaking
dissertation research. Average awards are $2,500 and do not exceed $3,500. Applications are
due by March 1.
Smithsonian Institution Predoctoral Fellowship: This award is intended for students who will
conduct research for 3-12 months at the Smithsonian. Applicants must have completed
coursework and preliminary examinations for the doctoral degree, and must be engaged in
dissertation research. The award provides a stipend of $25,000. Applications are due January
15.
Spencer Foundation Dissertation Fellowship Program: This award is intended to support
research relevant to the improvement of education. Fellowships are in the amount of $25,000
and support individuals whose dissertations show potential for bringing fresh and constructive
perspectives to the history, theory, or practice of formal or informal education anywhere in the
world. Applications are due in early November.
Social Science Research Council (SSRC) International Dissertation Research Fellowship: This
award is intended for graduate students wishing to pursue dissertation research abroad. The
organization favors site specific interdisciplinary research with ramifications beyond the local
context. The award provides nine to twelve months of support in the field with a maximum
award of $20,000. Applications are due in early November; announcements are made in April
of the following year.
Wenner-Gren Foundation Dissertation Fieldwork Fellowship: This award supports doctoral
students engaged in dissertation fieldwork with a clear anthropological focus. The award is for
the maximum amount of $25,000. Applications are due May 1 and November 1. Awards are
announced six months later.
Woodrow Wilson Doctoral Dissertation Fellowship in Womens Studies: This award is intended
for women with a commitment to womens issues and scholarship on women. Applicants must
be doctoral candidates who will complete their dissertation in the year for which they apply.
This award provides recipients with $3000 to be used for dissertation expenses. Applications
are due in early October.
Postdoctoral Fellowships
Description: Postdoctoral Awards provide one year or more of support following the
completion of the doctorate. Award amounts tend to be greater than a dissertation year
fellowship and many times require the applicant to locate a faculty mentor at a(nother)
university.
American Association of University Women (AAUW) American Postdoctoral Fellowship: This
award provides one-year of support of $30,000 for women who will have earned a doctoral
degree by Nov. 15 of the year in which they apply. This award is open to women in the arts and
humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences; one award is designated for a woman from an
underrepresented group in any field. Limited additional funds may be available when matched
by the fellow's institution. Applications are due in mid-November of each year for fellowships
beginning the following July.
Ford Foundation Postdoctoral Diversity Fellowship: The purpose of this award is to provide
postdoctoral support for one year to individuals who wish to pursue a career in college or
university teaching and research. The award provides a $40,000 stipend. Applications are due
in late November.
Mellon/American Council of Learned Societies Recent Doctoral Recipients Fellowship: This
award provides support for one year following the completion of the doctorate for scholars to
advance their research. This fellowship is limited to scholars awarded the Mellon/ACLS
Dissertation Completion Fellowships in the prior year, the Alternates selected in the prior year
Mellon/ACLS competition, and those awarded other dissertation fellowships of national stature
that require applicants to complete their dissertations within a specified period. This award
provides $30,000 of support. Applications are due in early December for fellowships beginning
the following June-September.
National Academy of Education/Spencer Foundation Postdoctoral Fellowship: This fellowship is
intended for Ph.D recipients working in critical areas of education research. In addition to
research support, this fellowship provides professional development activities. This award is in
the amount of $55,000 and can be spread over one or two years. Applications are due in early
November.
Stanford University Humanities Fellow Program: This postdoctoral award provides a two-year
position at Stanford for recent Ph.D. recipients in the Humanities. Postdoctoral award
recipients teach and do research in residence at Stanford. The 2009-2010 competition will be
open to linguistics Ph.D. recipients. Applications are due in early December for positions
beginning the following academic year.
UC Linguistic Minority Research Institute Grant: The purpose of this grant is to provide support
for research that improves the schooling conditions and academic achievement of language
minority youth by increasing understanding of the challenges they face, as well as the resources
they represent for the state. Proposals focused on bi-literacy, educational achievement and/or
California are especially encouraged. Award provides support for tuition and fees, living
stipend, and research expenses. Applications are due twice a year, on February 1 and October
1.
UC Presidents Postdoctoral Fellowship Program: This award provides one year of support to
doctoral degree recipients whose research focuses on diversity and multiculturalism.
Applicants must obtain the sponsorship of a University of California faculty member who is not
their Ph.D. dissertation advisor. The award is for a period of twelve months and for up to
$50,000. Applications are due in November.
Additional UC Davis Research Awards
Chancellors Teaching Fellowship: This fellowship is intended as a collaborative project between
a graduate student and a faculty member in order to provide the fellow an opportunity to
develop skills and gain experience in a variety of teaching activities (e.g., lecturing, leading labs
and discussions, constructing and grading exams). The award provides one quarter of fee
remission and a salary equivalent to a 50% Associate-In position. Applications are due in early
January.
Nancy Webb Scholarship: This is an endowed scholarship available specifically for Linguistics
graduate students at UC Davis. All students who submit the standard fellowship application
through Graduate Studies (due on January 15) are automatically considered for this award.
Second Language Acquisition Institute Mini-Grant: This award is open to UC students whose
research focuses on second language acquisition. Recipients receive one quarter of fee
remission and a GSR Level I stipend, either in the Spring Quarter of the year in which you apply
or the following Fall Quarter. Applications are due in March.
UC Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation Dissertation Fellowship: This award is open to
graduate students from all disciplines whose dissertation research addresses causes of
international conflict and opportunities for international cooperation. Applicants must be
advanced to candidacy before June of the year they apply. Applications are due in early
February.
UC Davis Graduate Washington Program: This program offers summer or academic year
support for graduate students to work as a TA and conduct research in Washington D.C.
Preference is given to applicants with strong teaching backgrounds and whose research would
benefit from living in Washington D.C. Applications are due in early March.
General Non-UC Davis Awards
Phi Beta Kappa of Northern California Scholarship: This award is available to Phi Beta Kappa
members enrolled in graduate programs in Northern Californian universities. Applicants must
apply through their university coordinator. Current UC Davis coordinator is Professor D. Kern
Holoman; Department of Music; (530) 752-9041; dkholoman@ucdavis.edu. Awards in 2007
were in the amount of $5,000. Check with campus coordinator for application due date.
Philanthropic, Educational Organization (P.E.O) Awards for California women: The following
awards are available through the P.E.O.: Ethel O. Gardner P.E.O. Scholarship, Janet H. Griswold
Scholarship and Dorothy Halleck Scholarship. Applicants must be California residents and
women. Award amounts range from $400 to $1100. Contact the organization early to request
an application packet. Applications are due February 10.


Tips on writing grant proposals (and other research proposals)
1


Mary Bucholtz
Department of Linguistics
bucholtz@linguistics.ucsb.edu

1. Start early. Proposal writing is extremely time-consuming, especially when youre first
starting out. Know exactly what you need to supply, and line things up well in advance.
For an external granting agency such as NSF or the SSRC, allow three months or more to
develop and revise your proposal. For shorter applications allow at least a month.

2. Know your granting agency. Read guidelines carefully and follow them. Use the appropriate
specialist terminology (i.e., jargon) for the agency, which may be different from the jargon of
your discipline. You need to be able to speak the language reviewers understandnever force
them to adapt to your worldview. Most granting agencies for the social sciences have a strong
science orientation, so youre usually safe in framing your proposal scientifically, with
discussion of hypotheses, methodology, data, and analysis. This style is more challenging for
interpretive and qualitative projects, but not impossible; just make clear that your methods are
sound, appropriate, and illuminating for your research question. Be aware that some granting
agencies (e.g., Wenner-Gren) may reject science-style proposals, so read the guidelines
carefully to ensure youre framing your project appropriately.

3. Be original, but not too original. Granting agencies are almost always a bit conservative by
nature; they want to be sure that their money will be well spent. Your work should either use
new theories/methods to investigate a familiar issue or should use familiar theories/methods
to investigate a new issue, but if your proposal is either too new or too familiar, it wont be a
good candidate for funding. Advisors can help you frame the project early on so you can
develop an effective proposal.

4. Tell a good story. Design your proposal so that its clear that your project is the crucial next
step in advancing knowledge: start broadly, foregrounding why the issue is important, highlight
gaps or weaknesses in the existing literature (but do so cautiously; see item 10 below), and
explain what new approach is needed and why. This approach, of course, should be the one
youre taking. But avoid building suspense: within the first sentence or paragraph you should
explicitly and briefly state the goals of the proposed study. This will help the reviewers to follow
the discussion.

5. Put your project at the center of your proposal. This is your opportunity to offer your
perspective on the field. Dont let other researchers agendas drive your discussion: focus on
what matters for your study. In particular, one common mistake in grant proposals is to survey
previous literature without clearly stating its relevance to the proposed study. Every detail you

1
This has been edited by Lisa Bonnici so as to be applicable to UC Davis linguistics graduate students.

include should be explicitly tied to your project one way or another. And dont forget to cite
your own previous research (e.g., a masters thesis) if appropriate.

6. Sound more confident than you (probably) are. You should aim for an authoritative
scholarly voice, not the voice of a tentative beginner (even if you feel like one). State your
research plans with as much certainty as you reasonably can without hedging or qualifying, but
never misrepresent the facts. Dont worry that youre promising to do a study that may turn out
quite differently from your description. Reviewers know that proposals are just that, not
guarantees of what will emerge from the research once you actually undertake it. Its expected
that things may turn out a bit differently, and often such surprises lead to the most important
new ideas. Finally, dont undermine your proposal by confessing what you see as weaknesses in
your plan; present the details in the most positive light possible and let the reviewers decide for
themselves.

7. Be specific. The best way to convince reviewers of your competence is to incorporate as
many specific details as you can about all aspects of the project. Your aim should be to offer
support or evidence for everything you say. Since space is limited, each sentence should carry a
great deal of information. Your proposal should be extremely information rich; inevitably, this
means it will be very dense reading, but thats the nature of the genre. To save space and keep
the focus on your own research, introduce others work mainly through parenthetical
references (or footnotes for humanities funding); strings of multiple citations help show the
depth of your familiarity with the field. You should also cite several bodies of relevant
literature, not just one. When describing your research context and design, include as many
specific facts as possible: dates, numbers, locations, a detailed and realistic timeline for your
plan of work, and a clear justification for each of your budget items (the latter is often a
separate document, but if not, part of the proposal narrative should mention the resources
needed for the study). These details help reviewers to see that you know your research
situation very well and have anticipated what you need to do to carry out the project
successfully.

8. Tell the reviewers who you are. The proposal should demonstratenot assertthat youre
the best person to carry out this research. You should describe your qualifications for doing the
proposed work in depth, but do so objectively and leave evaluation to the reviewers. Dont be
modest about your accomplishments, even if you dont feel that they amount to much (see
item 6 above). Mention any special skills or experience you have that help prepare you to carry
out the research (e.g., language skills, technical training). Selectively cite and briefly describe
your own previous research and make clear how the proposed project contributes to a
coherent research agenda.

9. Be explicit and redundant. Reviewers often read quickly and cursorily; make sure they see
the key information repeatedly and that its clearly explained and defined. Dont assume that
your proposal will be read by a specialist in exactly your field, so define terms briefly. Dont
assume that readers will find key information buried in one paragraph of the proposal, but
dont just repeat yourself mechanically, or it will look as though you dont have much to say
about your ideas. The best way to lay out key information is to introduce it briefly early in the
proposal, develop it at length in the body of the proposal, and then refer back to it in a later
section. Come up with a few varied ways to refer to your core idea or issue, but with similar
enough wording (e.g., a shared keyword) that readers will easily recognize it as the same
concept.

10. Be gentle in your critiques. You never know who will read your proposal, so dont say
anything in the proposal that you wouldnt want the target of your critique to see. In general,
avoid any explicit negative evaluation and describe any gaps or weaknesses in a way that you
think the author would view as a fair reading of their work. If anything, you should understate
your criticism. Academics are adept at reading between the lines; theyll understand when you
consider a particular study to be problematic.

11. Connect up to big issues and current trends. Granting agencies understand the value of
basic research (i.e., scholarship with no immediate applications to pressing problems), but they
still want the research they fund to have some connection to current issues, not only in your
field, but in academia broadly. Some agencies (e.g., NSF) also ask you to specify the broader
impacts that your work will have on society in general. You should state some plausible ways
that your research contributes to both knowledge and the betterment of humanity, even if the
benefits are somewhat tenuous or speculative. And if you can adjust your research plan to
achieve such benefits more directly, this will often enhance the projects fundability.

12. Look at some examples. The best way to learn to write a proposal is to look closely at a few
successful ones for the funding source to which youre applying. A number of funding sources
make sample proposals available to applicants and some books on grant writing offer examples.
Alternatively, you can ask peers or advisors to share their own proposals.

13. Get feedback from experienced grant writers/reviewers. This is not the time to call on your
peers; faculty will be most helpful. Give them plenty of lead time (at least a month for a major
proposal) in order to get detailed and high-quality feedback. Ask them to read it as a reviewer
and to be as critical as possible. Then incorporate their suggestions.

14. Submit to as many sources as you can, but adapt your proposal accordingly. Once youve
done one grant proposal, its much easier to write the next one for the same project (as well as
for other projects). Since grant funding is very competitive, its well worth applying to several
funding agencies, but you should always adapt your proposal to the specific guidelines and
concerns of each agency. This may mean reframing your project a bit, including different
references, highlighting different angles, but the heart of the proposalthe actual research
planshould not change.



Resources for grant writing
UC Davis Resources for grant preparation

Anthropology 206: Research Design and Method in Social Anthropology
In this course, which is usually offered in the Spring, you will be guided through the development of a
research proposal. See course description below:

Course Description: Seminar4 hours; individual student-instructor session (in-depth work on proposal
writing). Prerequisite: consent of instructor. Formulation of research problems and preparation of research
proposals; relationships between theory and method, funding, pre-fieldwork preparations, entering the
community, field research techniques, and problems of ethics; intensive work on proposal writing. May be
repeated once for credit. Limited enrollment.

Office of Graduate Studies:
The Office of Graduate Studies offers grant writing workshops throughout the year as part of their
Professional Development Series. View the list of workshops at: http://gsps.ucdavis.edu/pds/
Books

Chapin, Paul G. (2004). Research projects and research proposals: A guide for scientists seeking
funding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Despite the title, the book is aimed at researchers in the social sciences as well as the
sciences. The author is a former program director for the National Science Foundation.

Locke, Lawrence F., Waneen Wyrick Spirduso, & Stephen J. Silverman (2000). Proposals that
work: A guide for planning dissertations and grant proposals. 4th ed. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
Specifically aimed at graduate students and scholars beginning their career. Gives special
attention to qualitative and more humanistic research.
Websites

http://www.ssrc.org/fellowships/art_of_writing_proposals.page
Przeworski, Adam, & Frank Salomon (1995). The Art of Writing Proposals: Some Candid
Suggestions for Applicants to Social Science Research Council Competitions.

http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/DissPropWorkshop/:
An excellent free website designed to shed light on the dissertation proposal writing and
funding process. Includes sample budgets, style suggestions, and poignant essays.

http://sjoseph.ucdavis.edu/Faculty_Workshop/Helpful_Links_and_Resources_for_Research_Fu
nding.htm
This website was created by Suad Joseph, UC Davis Anthropologist, who here has compiled a
list of resources for research funding.
Sample Proposals
See Appendix A for examples of successful proposals from UC Davis linguistics graduate
students.
The Linguistic Minority Research Institution has two successful proposalsone qualitative, on
quantitative, available on their website at http://www.lmri.ucsb.edu/research/lmri-
grants/call.php
Check the funding agency website for sample proposals or proposal guides. If none are
available, email the award administrator and ask if any successful proposals are available to
potential applicants.

Funding Budget Preparation Guide
General Tips for Budget Preparation
Some funding agencies provide you with their own forms, others do not. Ensure you have all
appropriate forms needed.
Some funding agencies ask for a separate document in which you explain details of all items listed on
your budget, sometimes called a budget justification. Make sure you are clear on what you need for
each application.
Be specific and detailed when listing expenses. Provide a brief explanation of every item listed on
the budget.
Some awards, such as NSF, require you to use U.S. flag ship carriers (i.e., particular U.S. owned
airlines) for travel to the research site(s). Make sure to check your funding agencys policy on travel.
On your budget, list airfare estimates with airlines which meet the funding criteria. (E.g., if you find
KLM or Alitalia have very low fares, be aware that you may not be able to fly with them with award
money).
Check local newspapers and housing advertisements for average rents and include this reference
information in your budget.
Contact your funding agency and ask if conference travel for dissemination of research funding is a
permissible use of award funds.
If you are including tuition and/or university fees in your budget, verify that your funding agency
considers this a permissible use of award funds. Many awards have restrictions on use of funds
towards payment of school tuition and fees.
If you request internet and/or a cell phone, explain why they are essential for your research. For
example, in field research, a cell phone may be necessary for scheduling appointments with
participants.
Look up the per diem rates for the country in which you will be conducting research on the
following websites: http://perdiem.hqda.pentagon.mil/perdiem/ or
http://travel.ucdavis.edu/links.cfm. If your requested amount is less than the per diem rates, gently
point this out.
For local transportation, choosing the more economical option, e.g., buses instead of taxis, will show
the funding agency you are willing to stretch their dollar, euro, yen, rupee or frank.
For equipment, list the model, product name and number for each piece of equipment you intend to
purchase with award money. Instead of simply Dell Laptop, you should be very specific and go for
Dell Inspiron 1525 Laptop. You should also explain why you need the particular model over others,
and what it is to be used for.
For consultant fees, detail how much you intend to pay consultants and how you arrived at the rate
you did (e.g. local standard for transcription services)
Present your budget in an easy-to-read format.
Check your math! Make sure it all adds up and that you are not over budget.


Components of Budget
Below is a list of common components which you can include in your funding budget. Each award has
different restrictions as to allowable expenses; thus, it is important to read the application information closely,
and check with your funding agency if you have any remaining questions.
TUITION AND REGISTRATION FEES
HEALTH INSURANCE
LIVING EXPENSES
o Lodging
o Gas, Electricity, Water, etc.
o (Cell) Phone
o Internet Access
o Groceries
o Personal Care Items
TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION
o To research site (i.e., airfare)
o While at research site (i.e. taxis, bus/train fare)
o Conference travel to disseminate your result (flight, accommodation, meals and incidentals)
VISA AND PASSPORT EXPENSES
EQUIPMENT
o Laptop
o Software, especially for data coding and analysis
o Recording devices
o Microphones
o Data storage device (e.g. thumb drive, blank cds/dvds)
INFORMANT GIFTS
o In lieu of payment to participants for their time, some researchers purchase small locally-
acceptable gifts for participants. e.g. a small box of baked goods in Malta; a bag of nuts in India.
CONSULTANT FEES
o Payment to research consultants for transcription, data coding, translation services, etc.
BOOKS
o Funds for research publications, especially those which are unavailable in the university library
system.
OTHER MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES
o Miscellaneous items such as paper, printing cartridges, photocopies, blank cds, etc.

SAMPLE BUDGET (SEE APPENDIX A)
See successful NSF Proposal in Appendix A for examples of budgets and budget justification documents.
Appendix A: Successful Funding Proposals from UC Davis students
SLAI Mini-Grant Proposal: Ann Kelleher

Ann Kelleher March 2, 2007
Ph.D. Student
Department of Linguistics

Summary: This proposal is for the first part of a three-part project that will explore the language
learning experiences of the large and heterogeneous group of Cantonese/English bilingual
students who elect to enroll in Mandarin classes at U.C. Davis. The three phases of the project
will focus on Mandarin learners, the Cantonese/English bilingual community, and Mandarin
program and university administration. The overarching research question I will address is: what
is the relationship between language ideologies and language development for heritage language
learners in the formal, instructed setting of a university? I will undertake data collection during
Fall Quarter, 2007 for the first phase of the project.

Previous Research: A major thread of research in SLA has focused on individual differences in
language learning (Ellis, 1994). Until recently this area of research dealt almost exclusively with
considerations of the personal characteristics of learners extracted away from the social and
historical situations of language learning. Drnyeis (2007) review of recent SLA literature on
individual differences emphasizes that there is, as he calls it, a transformation going on in the
field. Across the main areas of research (personality, aptitude, motivation, learning styles and
learning strategies, as he identifies them) Drnyei says, there is a move toward considering how
context is a factor in understanding individual differences. Further he acknowledges that more
complex theoretical models are required to examine research question that propose to deal with
context.
Within the current SLA literature, Norton (2000) has empirically examined and theorized how
context relates to motivation; she captures the relationship between learners and language in the
notion of investment and ties outcomes, in part, to learners imagined communities (Norton,
2001). These theoretical constructs are particularly applicable to heritage language learners,
whom Valds (2001) defines (for purposes of university instruction) as students with a cultural
connection and some bilingual ability in a language of study. For these learners, the language of
study is not foreign, and while this will offer some advantages, connections also brings with
them a host of complexities on both the affective and linguistics levels (Peyton, Ranard and
McGinnis, 2001).
He (2004) makes the case for the relevance of findings based on Conversation Analysis to
SLA. Her field of research is also Chinese as a heritage language and she points to the benefits of
a combined CA/ethnomethodological approach. I have also taken a similar approach in prior
research. Kelleher (2006, unpublished M.A. thesis) uses surveys, interviews and discourse
analysis to examine questions of heritage learner placement in a university Chinese program. A
portion of the study is currently under review for publication as a book chapter in a volume
tentatively titled Chinese as a Heritage Language.

Research questions: Given that the study of heritage language learners is relatively new, and
that research in SLA is just beginning to consider the effects of context on instructed language
development, this study will focus on the micro-level decision-making processes of learners and
relate their perspectives to the larger social, historical and institutional dynamics in which they
find themselves. To begin, I will address the following questions in the first phase of the study:
1) How do Cantonese/English bilingual students frame their decisions to study Mandarin? What
are the underlying beliefs (i.e. ideologies) about language that drive their decisions to study
Mandarin? 2) How do these students relate their choice to study Mandarin to being
Cantonese/English bilingual? What underlying beliefs about language are highlighted in the
connections they draw? And, 3) How do the students view their learning outcomes in Mandarin
classes (positive or negative) relative to being bilingual in Cantonese and English?

Setting, Participants and Methodology: The setting for this study will be U.C. Davis. The
participants in the first phase of the study will be eight (four female/four male)
Cantonese/English bilingual students enrolled in one of two classes during Fall Quarter 07,
CHN 1CN or CHN 111. I plan to administer a language background survey early in the quarter
to the two classes and ask for volunteers to be interviewed.
Sociolinguistic interview techniques (Tagliamonte, 2006) will be used to collect information
from participants. Analysis for the first part of the study will be primarily Systemic-Functional
Linguistic analysis (Martin and Rose, 2003) of the student interviews combined with Critical
Discourse Analysis (Fairclough, 1995) to place the students comments within a larger social
framework.

Significance of this project: This project comes at a critical time in terms of Mandarin teaching
in the U.S. One visible effect of Chinas economic expansion is an increasingly popular focus on
Mandarin as a language of study in the U.S. through both internal and external processes. The
Chinese government is expanding its support of Chinese teaching in the U.S., opening additional
facilities, providing textbooks and materials to schools, and sending scores of new teachers.
Internal to the U.S., there is a pressure to increase the number of civil servants proficient in
Mandarin, and within this context, heritage language learners have become an object of focus.
As Ricento (2005) points out, the discourses around heritage learners focus on the tapping of a
national resource. Rather than examining the potential for students with early exposure to a
variety of Chinese (but without significant ability in Mandarin) to become high-proficiency
Mandarin users, this project seeks to tease apart the complex web of social and linguistic
processes surrounding the difficult decision heritage learners face when considering whether
they will become a learner of a language they are at times expected to know and once in the
classroom, how their background affects the L2 acquisition processwhen the L2 is a
heritage language.

References
Dornyei, Zoltan (2007). Individual differences in second language acquisition. AILA Review 19:
42-68.
Ellis, Rod (1994). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
He, Agnes Weiyun (2004). CA for SLA: Arguments from the Chinese language classroom.
The Modern Language Journal. 88:4 568.
Fairclough, Norman (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language.
London: Longman.
Norton, B. (2000). Identity and Language Learning: Gender, Ethnicity and Educational Change.
Harlow, England: Pearson Education.
Norton, B. (2001). Non-participation, imagined communities and the language classroom. In
Learner contributions to Language Learning: ew directions in research, M.P. Breen (ed.),
159-171. Harlow: Longman.
Peyton, J. K., Ranard, D.A. & McGinnis, S. (Ed.s). (2001). Heritage Languages in America:
Preserving a ational Resource. McHenry, IL: The Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta
Systems.
Thomas Ricento (2005). Problems with the 'language as resource' discourse in the promotion of
heritage languages in the U.S.A. Journal of Sociolinguistics. 9 (3), 348368.
Tagliamonte, Sali. (2006). Analysing Sociolinguistic Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ.
Press.
Valds, G. (2001). Heritage Language Students: Profiles and Possibilities. In J. Peyton, J. Ranard
& S. McGinnis (Ed.s), Heritage Languages in America: Preserving a National Resource (pp.
37-80). McHenry, IL: The Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta Systems.


SLAI Mini-Grant Proposal: Yuriko Miyamoto Caltabiano

Yuriko Miyamoto Caltabiano
Ph.D. Candidate
Department of Linguistics
Summary: In this project, the relationships between Japanese language development, heritage
language maintenance, learners multicultural and multilingual identities, and language attitudes
in Japan are explored. Specifically, this project seeks to understand how diverse learners
construct, perform and negotiate their multiple identities in different contexts with numerous
people expressing various language attitudes, and how it affects their Japanese language
development and heritage language maintenance. As identity and language studies of adults in
western contexts claim that identities have a great influence on multilingual language use, and
consequently influence language maintenance and learning (Norton, 1995), is such claim
relevant for multilingual children growing up in monolingual Japan? By ethnographic
longitudinal observation of four multilingual families, this project aims to offer a view of second
language acquisition and development, negotiation of multiple identities, and language attitudes.
Background and Previous Research: With the sudden increase of foreign residents and
immigrants in Japan, the country has turned into a more culturally and linguistically diverse
community than ever. A few reasons can be cited for this sudden change (Kanno; 2007); influx
of South Americans of Japanese descent, repatriation of war orphans from China and Sakhalin
(Russia), recognition of refugees from Southeast Asia. These are only a few reasons among
others. They are all supporting the aging population with low birth rates in Japan, sometimes on
the expense of their childrens quality of education and their healthy language and identity
development. A growing body of research on language minority education in Japan has reported
that once multilingual children start attending school, some become reluctant to speak their
heritage language possibly becoming monolinguals, or for better or worse, become double-
limited bilinguals (Nakajima, 1998). If that is the case, how does it affect their multicultural and
multilingual identities, growing up in a country where it is accustomed to viewing itself as
homogeneous with one language and one ethnicity?
Research Questions: The following questions will be addressed in this study. 1) How and to
what extent do multilingual children construct, perform, and negotiate their multiple identities?
Are there opportunities for them to express their multilingual identities and use their heritage
language in Japanese society? 2) How do Japanese peoples attitudes influence multilingual
childrens identities and language development? What kind of attitude can encourage them to
perform their multiple identities and use their heritage language? 3) What roles do student
volunteer tutors play on multicultural families experiences living and growing up in Japan?
Setting, Participants, and Methodology: The four families are registered in the Volunteer
Home Tutoring program run by Kanagawa Junior College (all names are pseudonyms) located
in the suburbs of Tokyo. The program offers help to children with homework and studying for
school as well as teaching Japanese to their family members at their homes, and currently they
are serving over 200 members in the community. The junior college students are the tutors, and
the researcher is participating as a tutor to four families. The four families, two Peruvian, one
Vietnamese, and one Cambodian, have two to four children each. The age range of the seven
focal participants is from six to nineteen. All of them were born in Japan, and their first language
appears to be Japanese with different levels of heritage language proficiency. Data being
collected for this study are fieldnotes and a few recordings of weekly tutoring sessions,
interviews with children and family members, childrens school classroom observations,
interviews with school teachers, student tutors weekly journals, interviews with student tutors
and staffs of the Volunteer Home Tutoring program, and relevant documents. This project
started in the fall 2007, and may continue onto the fall 2008 with the support of this grant.
Significance of this Project: Most of the previous studies in Japan conduct only a one-time
survey and are limited in context. The findings of this ethnographic project will provide valuable
information on what should be considered when providing an effective and fair education for all
children with diverse cultural and language background in Japan. It is also important, or more
important, to educate Japanese people to accept diversity and promote equality. The findings of
this study will help raise cultural and linguistic awareness among the people in Japan and help
the community to work together to achieve a true multicultural and multilingual society without
discrimination where children can grow up to speak their heritage language with pride. This has
implications to diverse societies not only in current Japan but in other parts of the world.
References:
Kanno, Y. (2007). Language and education in Japan: Unequal access to bilingualism.
Palgrave/Macmillan.
Nakajima, K. (1998). Bairingaku kyiku no hh: chiky jidai no ihonjin ikusei o mezashite.
Tokyo: Aruku.
Norton, B.P. (1995). Social identity, investment and language learning. TESOL Quarterly 29(1),
9-31.
Washington Program Graduate Fellowship: Tammy Gales
Personal Essay
My reasons for applying for the Washington Program Graduate Fellowship are twofold. First, as
a doctoral student who will be starting her dissertation research next fall, an extended stay in
the Washington DC area will not only be of great import to my upcoming doctoral research, but
an actual physical presence in DC will be vital to my proposed work with the Federal Bureau of
Investigations Behavioral Analysis Unit. Second, as a trained teacher with over 10 years of
experience in guiding students through the various stages of the writing process, I believe that I
can be an invaluable asset to the undergraduate students who participate in your program.
As a linguist whose research interests focus on discourse analysis, I see the many benefits that a
close study of language can provide. Fortunately, so too does the FBI, as demonstrated through
their groundbreaking work in criminal cases involving the intricacies of language. Their most
recent success story, for example, occurred between 1978 and 1996, when the FBI conducted
what would be their largest and most expensive criminal investigation to datethe case of the
Unabomber. It encompassed nearly eighteen years, several hundred local and federal law
enforcement agents, and an estimated $50 million in investigative costs. What most people do
not know, however, is that the Unabomber was eventually found and caught not through
fingerprint or DNA evidence, but through the largest textual analysis project in the history of
the U.S. criminal justice system (Fitzgerald, 2005). Soon afterwards, with so much prominence
being placed on the fine-grained analysis of language, the FBI began to understand the need to
increase their knowledge of and ability to analyze language in a scientifically-acceptable
manneri.e. through a corpus of authentic language texts. However, like most federal
organizations that discover a valuable resource deemed to be outside immediate connections
to national security, the goal of creating an electronic database of all threatening
communications, which could be used in future cases to aid agents in analyzing and assessing
new threats, has been buried in a pile of paperwork. After discussing this amazing resource at a
recent language and the law conference with those in charge of the Behavioral Analysis
division, an opportunity was presented to me that will allow their goal of creating and analyzing
a corpus of threatening communications to move forward while offering me a wealth of new
material in which to immerse myself for the purpose of researching and writing my dissertation.
What the FBI has requested is for me to lead this project by organizing and shaping the
database, analyzing the nuances that exist in the genre of threatening communications, and
developing and teaching a seminar that explicates the findings, all of which will offer the fields
of linguistics and law enforcement a more complete and well-defined system for using language
as a tool for justice.
As a teacher, who was very recently nominated for an outstanding teaching assistant award at
the University of California, Davis, I have lived with the philosophy that every experience in life
provides a teachable momentthat is everything one does provides a chance for learning.
What I see in this opportunity is not only a chance to use the theoretical knowledge I have
acquired through my academic training in an applied manner that will be beneficial to the
larger social community, but also a chance to take the knowledge I have attained through all of
my lifes work and give it back to those who can directly benefit from it. This means using
everything I have gained personally as well as professionally from my former teaching,
researching, and editing experiences. As a trained teacher, I have worked with and mentored a
diverse range of studentsfrom working with adults and children to improve literacy skills on
the Navajo reservation to working with native and non-native speakers of English in various
undergraduate composition classes at Northern Arizona University and the University of
California, Davis, and from working to increase the literacy skills of at risk high school students
in an inner city school in Houston, Texas to working with students of all ages in Greece in
preparation for their national reading and writing exam in English language skills. Each group of
students has brought a new set of challenges from which to learn as well as a new source of joy,
which continues to motivate me. Furthermore, as an avid researcher interested in the inner-
workings of language, I have collaborated and worked independently on a variety of projects in
the fields of social sciences and humanities from the fine-grained analysis of several Native
languages of California to a large scale study of genre in Navajo texts. Other projects involved
the creation of an authentic English language corpus and a detailed analysis of the ideology of
diversity in political and legal language in the U.S. Each project required a thorough knowledge
of grant-writing, investigative researching, and proposal-writing, and concluded with a
presentation at a professional conference. Finally, as an experienced editor, who worked
closely with more than 50 authors on the acquisition, contract, proposal, draft, revision, and
final editing stages of their non-fiction manuscripts, I know that writing and research are a
processa process exactly like that required of the undergraduate students who participate in
the Washington Program.
In my experiences, then, of teaching, researching, and mentoring writers of all levels from
professional writers to young impressionable students, I have successfully guided students
through the difficult stages of narrowing down a concept into a workable thesis, brainstorming
research questions to help frame their work, writing up a proposal that will eventually take
shape as a rough draft, supplying countless substantive comments of a constructive nature to
help guide them through the difficult revision phase, and finally walking them through the final
editing process whereby they see their own work through a fresh pair of eyes. The completion
of this lengthy process results in a final, polished project of which each writer can be proud.
Not everyone finds that their personal passions and professional skills intersect in life, but in
this case, I have found the perfect fit. Thank you for providing the opportunity to seek a new
challenge, a way to grow, and an avenue for pursuing my goals. I am greatly appreciative of the
chance to be considered for this fellowship.

National Science Foundation Dissertation Research Improvement Grant: Lisa Bonnici

Project Summary
Doctoral Dissertation Research: Variation in Maltese English

Intellectual Merit: In sociolinguistics, the utility of the speech community construct has long
been criticized as propagating a monolingual language ideology (Patrick 2004). Particularly in
language contact settings, the Labovian conception of a speech community as sharing norms of
acceptability of language use as evidenced by uniform patterns of language variation and
evaluation of speech, has yet to be successfully applied to bilingual, language contact settings
(Labov 1972). The current state of knowledge in the field has yet to resolve the debate as to
whether the various instantiations of speech community can successfully model a bilingual
context.
The proposed project aims to describe linguistic variation in Maltese English (MaltE),
a postcolonial variety of English spoken in Malta a bilingual island-nation south of Italy in the
Mediterranean (Mazzon 1993; Vella 1995). Variation in the linguistic features of high-level
English-Maltese bilinguals and in participants attitudes towards English will be examined
through informal sociolinguistic interviews with participants from three age groups and two
genders. By focusing on the minute micro-level patterns of language use in Malta, this project
will examine the nature of this highly bilingual setting through an empirical, variationist study of
language in use. The widespread yet heterogeneous character of Maltese-English bilingualism
provides the ideal setting with which to engage and better understand the nature and diversity of
bilingual communities. Malta offers an understudied distinctive case of stable societal
bilingualism with English in both a postcolonial and a Western context and provides a sound
opportunity to elevate linguists current understanding of the utility of the speech community
construct for cases of societal bilingualism and of established as well as newly emerging theories
of postcolonial Englishes. In bilingual settings, especially postcolonial settings, English
language use is embedded in conflicting tensions of participation in an increasingly globalizing
economy on the one hand and rejection of former colonial powers on the other (Canagarajah
1999; Kachru 1986; Krishnaswamy and Burde 1998; Mair 2003; Schneider 2007). While
research into post-colonial Englishes is burgeoning, the majority of the work in this area focuses
on non-Western contexts where colonial powers entered a given place against the wishes of the
indigenous residents (Kachru 1986; Kachru 1985; Schneider 2007). The case of Malta differs;
the British took control over the islands at the request of the Maltese indigenous population and
Maltas miniscule size and economic reliance on foreigners (Maltas largest industry is tourism)
has historically resulted in large-scale multilingualism (Camilleri 1992; Cassar 2001). This
research will investigate the local ways people mitigate these tensions and conflicting desires of
a) participating in an increasingly globalizing economy and culture on the one hand, and b)
maintaining distance from colonial pasts on the other, through an examination of participants
language attitudes towards MaltE as collected during the interviews. The sometimes tense and
conflicting roles of Malta as both a postcolonial nationwhich traditionally have been
characterized as distancing themselves from the colonizers through the development of
endonormative linguistic practices (Schneider 2007) and as a recent E.U. member state
desiring integration with Europe will be investigated through a focus on the linguistic variants
used by English-dominant individuals in Malta in comparison to their expressed ideologies of
language

Broader Impacts: Undertaking this research on MaltE will benefit Maltese and American
researchers and linguists interested in postcolonial Englishes, language contact, and bilingual
communities. Malta is a rich, bilingual context yet one of the most understudied linguistic
contexts in Europe. The proposed project will forge long-term international partnerships
between U.S. linguists and the local Maltese linguistics community and foster dialogue and
collaboration with both Maltese linguists and students of linguistics through future collaborative
research projects. Additionally, the proposed project will introduce quantitative methods to
Maltese linguistics researchers and students. This project marks the first quantitative study of
linguistic variation in Malta, and Co-PI Bonnici intends to deliver a talk about the quantitative
paradigm at the Institute of Linguistics at the University of Malta during her research trip. In
addition, she will employ and mentor two Maltese linguistics students in the transcription phase
of the research, thereby augmenting their ability to conduct original research in the future,
A significant impact of the proposed research will be to expand the database on bilingual
communities, which, as we know, include most of the world's population. As Romaine (1995)
has argued, the study of bilingualism should be the prime task of modern linguistics. The
proposed project contributes substantially toward this goal.

Project Proposal
Doctoral Dissertation Research: Variation in Maltese English

1.0 Introduction
In sociolinguistics, the utility of the speech community construct has long been criticized
as propagating a monolingual language ideology (Patrick 2004). Particularly in language contact
settings, the Labovian conception of a speech community as sharing norms of acceptability of
language use as evidenced by uniform patterns of language variation and evaluation of speech,
has yet to be successfully applied to bilingual, language contact settings (Labov 1972). The
difficulty of applying this widespread construct to bilingual contexts has led some scholars to
abandon the speech community model altogether and begin engaging with a new model the
bilingual language setting (Santa Ana 1993). Other scholars, notwithstanding these debates,
continue to utilize the construct without an engagement in these theoretical issues, while a third
cohort has shifted focus away from the speech community model altogether in favor of more
ethnographic, small scale studies of communities of practice (Eckert 2000; Mendoza-Denton
1997; Zhang 2005). The current state of knowledge in the field has yet to resolve the debate as to
whether the various instantiations of speech community can successfully model a bilingual
context.
The proposed project aims to describe linguistic variation in Maltese English (MaltE),
a postcolonial variety of English spoken in Malta a bilingual island-nation located south of
Italy in the Mediterranean which has been shown to exhibit deviations from the British
standard (Mazzon 1993; Vella 1995). Variation 1) in the linguistic features of high-level
English-Maltese bilinguals, i.e., individuals who have used English or English and Maltese at
home from a young age and for whom English is the most dominant language, and 2) in
participants attitudes towards English will be examined through informal sociolinguistic
interviews with participants from three age groups and two genders. By focusing on the minute
micro-level patterns of language use in Malta, this project proposes to examine the nature of this
highly bilingual setting through an empirical, variationist study of language in use. The
widespread yet heterogeneous nature of Maltese-English bilingualism in Malta, discussed below,
provides the ideal setting with which to engage and better understand the nature and diversity of
bilingual communities. Malta offers an understudied distinctive case of stable societal
bilingualism with English in both a postcolonial and a Western context which provides a sound
opportunity to elevate linguists current understanding of the utility of the speech community
construct for cases of societal bilingualism and of established as well as newly emerging theories
of postcolonial Englishes.
In bilingual settings, especially postcolonial settings, English language use is embedded
in conflicting tensions of participation in an increasingly globalizing economy on the one hand
and rejection of former colonial powers on the other (Canagarajah 1999; Kachru 1986;
Krishnaswamy and Burde 1998; Mair 2003; Schneider 2007). While research into post-colonial
Englishes is burgeoning, the majority of the work in this area focuses on non-Western contexts
where colonial powers entered a given place against the wishes of the indigenous residents
(Kachru 1986; Kachru 1985; Schneider 2007). The case of Malta differs in this and many
regards including that the British took control over the islands at the request of the Maltese
indigenous population and that the miniscule size of Malta as well as its economic reliance on
foreigners (Maltas largest industry is tourism) has historically resulted in large-scale
multilingualism (Camilleri 1992; Cassar 2001). This research will investigate the local ways
people mitigate these tensions and conflicting desires of a) participating in an increasingly
globalizing economy and culture on the one hand, and b) maintaining distance from colonial
pasts on the other, through an examination of participants language attitudes towards MaltE as
collected during the interviews. The sometimes tense and conflicting roles of Malta as both a
postcolonial nationwhich traditionally have been characterized as distancing themselves from
the colonizers through the development of endonormative linguistic practices (Schneider
2007) and as a recent E.U. member state desiring integration with Europe will be investigated
through a focus on the linguistic variants used by English-dominant individuals in Malta in
comparison to their expressed ideologies of language.
Malta clearly differs from other postcolonial and bilingual settings, and hence provides
the opportunity to a) examine the utility of the speech community construct for a unique and
understudied bilingual setting b) test and enhance the dominant models of postcolonial Englishes
(most notably, that of Schneider [2007] and Kachru [1986]), and c) enrich our understanding of
the process by which linguistic forms acquire social meanings, how linguistic forms are
entrenched in larger socio-political occurrences such as globalization and postcolonialism. The
results of the proposed research will be disseminated so as to raise awareness both locally, in
Malta, and on an international level of the local tensions and negotiations surrounding the spread
of English. In order to achieve these aims, this project will utilize a micro-level variationist
framework based on sociolinguistic interviews with speakers of Maltese English.

2.0 Proposed Research
These theoretical and methodological issues motivate this first variationist study of English
in Malta. The proposed project will investigate variation in Maltese English (MaltE) through an
examination of the linguistic, social and stylistic factors conditioning variation in the English of
English-dominant Maltese/English bilinguals. Data will be collected by means of sociolinguistic
interviews which will be designed to meet the following two objectives: a) eliciting casual,
unmonitored speech to capture naturalistic MaltE features, b) eliciting speech on speakers
linguistic awareness of and language attitudes towards MaltE, language change, and the role and
status of English in Malta. Our research questions are as follows:

1. Linguistic Variation: Which features of MaltE vary? Can the linguistic features of MaltE
be modeled quantitatively? If so, what linguistic, social, and stylistic factors are conditioning
variation in MaltE?

2. Stylistic Variation: How do the linguistic variables under study pattern across speech styles?
Specifically, in more careful speech, do speakers tend to use features of the former colonizers
standard variety, British RP, or are local forms utilized even in the most careful speech
styles?

3. Social Factors and Variation: In the three generations of speakers under study, how is
MaltE changing over time? Are new, local linguistic norms being valorized as has been noted
in other postcolonial varieties (Schneider 2007) or are speakers continuing to aspire towards
a foreign standard, namely British RP, the variety of their former colonizers? Has
globalization and increased access to American media resulted in the introduction of
American English features into MaltE? Does American English offer a more neutral English
alternative than British English?

4. Language attitudes: What are participants attitudes towards MaltE and Maltese? What is
the relationship between participants language attitudes and the features of their MaltE?

Sociolinguistic research in Malta is still in its infancy. The few scholars working in this area
have thus far undertaken largely macro-sociolinguistic research projects which have focused on
two main areas: a) language attitudes and b) language use in the classroom. The micro-
linguistic research on English in Malta is both extremely limited and plagued with a lack of
systematicity, a reliance on speaker intuitions and a failure to consider and/or disclose the
language background of informants. This research, while advancing our understanding of the
speech community as relevant to postcolonial and bilingual, language contact settings, will also
advance the field of Maltese sociolinguistics, a small, yet rich linguistic area.

3.0 Relation to the present state of knowledge in the field
World Englishes emerged as a field of inquiry which sought to recognize and describe
localized, institutionalized varieties of English spoken around the world. Developed by Kachru
(1986; 1985) and dispersed largely through the journal World Englishes, the World Englishes
(WE) model consists of three circles of Englishthe inner, outer and expanding circles
which correspond to different historical trajectories of the rise of English around the world
(Crystal 2003). Inner circle Englishes denote the traditional bases of English, i.e. the United
States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand (Crystal 2003:59).
Outer circle English-speaking nations are those with a history of British and American
colonization and in which English has become institutionalized. Traditionally cited as outer
circle English nations are India, Singapore and Nigeria. Expanding circle English nations are
those without a history of colonization by inner circle nations and where English is learned as an
additional, foreign language. Expanding circle English nations recognize the importance of
English as an international language (Crystal 2003:59). Given these definitions, English in
Malta would be said to belong to the outer circle of Kachrus World Englishes modelit has a
history of British colonization and the language has become institutionalized in many domains,
as discussed later in this proposal. Malta stands apart from other nations characterized as outer
circle, however, because of its geographic location in Western Europe, its affinity to European
culture and administrative bodies, its more amicable history of (de)colonization, and its position
as a modern European culture and nation. Therefore, while the way in which English came to be
spoken in Malta was through British colonization, Malta is a unique outer English case of high-
levels of societal bilingualism in a modern state.
In this way, Malta raises some issues for Kachrus model. Namely, because it assumes
that nations belonging to the same circle share similar patterns of use and ideologies towards
English, the World Englishes model homogenizes English speakers. Since much work on post-
colonial Englishes has focused on non-Western contexts (Kachru 1986; Kachru 1985;
Krishnaswamy and Burde 1998; Schneider 2007) and little empirical research has examined
institutionalized forms of English in Western contexts, the proposed research will fill this
theoretical gap in the World English literature. Second, because it is a state-based model, World
Englishes assumes the patterns of use and ideologies of English within a given nation are
uniform, while in reality a vast array of English fluency levels do exist as do a range of attitudes
towards English. For example, the model erases the possibility of English functioning as both an
L1 and a foreign language in a given nation. This is because the model is set up to describe
nations rather than speech communities (see Gumperz 1968; Hymes 1986; Labov 1972),
communities of practice (see Eckert 2000; Lave and Wenger 1991), or intra-speaker variation
and style (see Schilling-Estes 2002).
More recently, Edgar Schneider proposed a typology of postcolonial Englishes, i.e.
varieties of English which in Kachrus model would be largely characterized as outer circle
varieties, arguing that all postcolonial Englishes follow the same stages of development as they
are essentially contact varieties with colonial pasts (2007). Synchronic differences across
postcolonial varieties are explained in terms of varieties being more or less further along the five
stages of variety development proposed: foundation, exonormative stabilization, nativization,
endonormative stabilization, and differentiation (Schneider 2007). Schneider provides countless
case study examples tracing the development of postcolonial varieties, yet the fact remains that
these case studies focus largely on settler colonies and non-Western contexts, and thus, do not
account for a case similar to the Malta context. Researching MaltE, then, serves as a powerful
test to this novel perspective on postcolonial, contact varieties of English.
Schneiders work is the first to bring together contact linguistics and research on
postcolonial varieties of English. In aiming to describe postcolonial varieties, however, a
demarcation of the speech community has often times been overlooked, with researchers
failing to provide sufficient information about participants linguistic histories. Work on ethnic
varieties of English in the U.S. has established the heterogeneity of speakers language fluencies
in bilingual contexts in detail (Mendoza-Denton 1997; Santa Ana 1993; Santa Ana and Bayley
2004; Zentella 1997); thus by failing to characterize the language backgrounds of participants,
much of the work on postcolonial varieties of English is undermined. As was the case at the
genesis of research on Chicano English, for example, where the existence of Chicano English as
a distinct variety of English was questioned and explained as the result of interference
phenomena and improper second language acquisition (Santa Ana 1993)
2
, postcolonial English
research is at a critical point, in needing to carefully delimit the group under study These two
bodies of researchliterature on postcolonial varieties and bilingual contact settingshave
shaped the design of the proposed research in such a way as to avoid earlier arguments against
the existence of distinct new English varieties. By delimiting study participants and first
focusing on variation in L1 MaltE speakers, the proposed research will avoid the problems which
plagued early research on Chicano English (see Sawyer 1970), while also advancing
methodological techniques in the study of new English varieties.

4.0 Background

4.1 Historical Background: Malta
English in Malta, a small Mediterranean island-republic located sixty miles south of
Sicily, is rooted in a history of British colonialism. Maltese and English are spoken by its
populace with Italian as a third language of many Maltese people. Maltese is historically a
Semitic language which has been influenced tremendously by Romance languages and dialects,
especially Italian and Sicilian, and more recently, English. While Italian held a position of
prestige in Malta in the past, English is now the predominant and major language alongside
Maltese on the islands, sharing co-official status with Maltese. Effects of language contact
between Maltese and Italian characterize the majority of research in Maltese linguistics. Far less
documented is the history and development of English on the island, the bi-directional influence
of Maltese and English on each other and the structure and social positions of this post-colonial
variety of English in Europe.

4.2 English in Malta
English came to Malta in 1800 when British forces aided in removing Napoleon from the
island. Malta became a colony of Britain and remained so until its independence in 1964 (Sciriha
2001). However, for a long period of British rule, Italian retained official status on the islands,
as it was the preferred language of the Maltese elite as well as many religious Maltese Catholics.
As Berdichevsky writes Many conservative and devoutly Catholic Maltese saw in Italian their
link with European civilization and a truer expression of historic Maltese identity with its links to
the church and Latin than English (2004:71). The lower classes used Maltese, which was
derisively called lingwa tal-kcina (language of the kitchen), while Italian was widespread
among the upper classes. That Italian remained prominent among the upper and middle classes
until the beginning of the twentieth century serves to explain why English spread slowly on the
islands.
Beginning in the late 19
th
century, the British sought to replace Italian with English as the
official language of the islands as the high position of Italian was found to be logistically
unfavorable all official documents had to be made available in Italian and destabilizing to the
central government. It was not until 1934 that the British government successfully replaced
Italian with English by appealing to Maltese citizens, calling for the promotion of Maltese to
national language status, while English became an official language alongside Maltese, as well
as the language of education, administration and civil service (Mazzon 1993). Thus, from 1934

2
In her work in San Antonio, for instance, Sawyer (1970) claimed that a Mexican American variety of English does
not exist; rather English spoken by Mexican Americans is a transitory result of incomplete acquisition of English by
adolescent and adult immigrants (Bayley 1999:120).
onwards, English use grew rapidly on the islands. The international role of English was
growing, and the Maltese recognized its importance and allowed it to infiltrate their society,
as Italian had done before it (Mifsud 1995). English steadily acquired domains previously held
by Italian, which is now exclusively a foreign language on the islands.

4.3 Domains of Language Use: English
English is extremely widespread in all domains in Maltese society. Today, English is still
the dominant language of education. The medium of instruction is largely English in private
schools, while extensive English-Maltese codeswitching by both teachers and pupils has been
documented in public schools (Camilleri 1991). Textbooks are in English as Maltese materials
are still limited in their availability, major exams are administered in English and English is the
official language of the Royal University of Malta, Maltas sole university (Camilleri 1991;
Micheli 2001). Regarding the media, of the four daily newspapers, two are published in English
(The Times and The Independent). While the majority of Maltas 19 local radio stations
broadcast in Maltese, music is largely in English, and international stations alongside three local
stations broadcast in English. Maltas local television stations broadcast a few locally produced
programs in Maltese, yet all English language films and foreign programming are shown in
English without subtitles or dubbing (Camilleri 1992). Satellite television service is widespread
and principally in English.
English is used for written correspondence in many domains including the Civil Service.
Also, because English is almost exclusive in its role as the linguistic source of new terminology
connected with modern life, such as in the fields of science, technology and sport, and because
of the international nature of Maltas economy, English tends to be the preferred language of
economy and trade (Camilleri-Grima 2000:4). Maltese is the official language of the Parliament
and the judiciary; however, most legal documents are made available in both languages. In her
earlier work, Camilleri provides a useful schematic of language use by domain, reproduced
below (1995).


MALTESE ENGLISH
spoken written spoken written

administration
parliament + +
courts + + +
church + + +
broadcasting
t.v. + +
radio + +
theatre + +
cinema +
newspapers + +
publications + +
work + + + +
home + + + +
education + + + +

Table 1: Domains of language use in Malta (Camilleri, 1995)

The outline of languages across domains in Table 1 is meant as a broad characterization of
language use in Malta. In reality, virtually all oral speech events involve some degree of
English-Maltese code-switching. Malta has been described as a situation of bilingualism without
diglossia, where two languages compete for use in the same domains (Camilleri-Grima 2000;
Fishman 1967).
At the level of the individual, levels of English and Maltese fluency and use have best
been described in terms of family language background. In her work on the sociolinguistic status
of English in Malta, Camilleri divides Maltese families into five language types, shown in Table
2. In Family Type A, both English and Standard Maltese are acquired at school; the childs first
language is a nonstandard dialect (dialect) of Maltese. Families of this type tend to live in
smaller villages and especially on Gozo, Maltas second largest island. In Family Type B,
Standard Maltese is the mother tongue of both parents and it is the first language of a child.
English is acquired at school, akin to children in family type A. In Type C families, the child is
raised in a household where codeswitching is the norm, and contentiously, Camilleri argues that
these childrens first language is neither English nor Maltese, but rather a variety of mixed
Maltese and English. In type D families, English is the first language of the child with Maltese
being learned in school and through socialization with other Maltese speakers. At the recent
Maltese Linguistics conference in Bremen, Germany, Camilleri announced a new family type
(Type E), where the L1 is dialect Maltese and the L2 is English (Camilleri-Grima 2007). The
assertion is that Standard Maltese is not acquired by individuals in this family type.
While Camilleris family type model is a useful heuristic in identifying the major types of
language backgrounds that exist in Malta today, it is too simplistic in some ways including its
failure to consider comprehension versus production abilities. There are, for example,
individuals who are exposed to Maltese at home, but tend towards responding in English. Also,
real time changes in patterns of language use are not captured in this static model. Mazzon notes
instances of families using solely English when their children are young and only after a child
has acquired a good level of English do parents begin to speak to the child in Maltese (1993)
3
.
Lastly, as in any typology, the process of erasure occurs in which families who do not fit neatly
into one specific category are rendered invisible (Irvine and Gal 2000).








Table 2: Order of language acquisition in different Maltese families. (from Camilleri,
1992).
Despite the widespread use of English in Malta in all domains, the majority rate of
bilingualism, the evidence of an emerging ethnic variety of English, and the increasing number
of individuals for whom English is an L1 to the exclusion of Maltese, English in Malta is still

3
This is, of course, tied to the social status of English in Malta and its predominance in education.
Family Type Languages acquired (in chronological order)
A 1. Dialect; 2. Standard Maltese; 3. English
B 1. Standard Maltese 2. English
C 1. Standard Maltese and English
D 1. English 2. Standard Maltese
E 1. Dialect Maltese 2. English
described as a foreign language by some Maltese scholars. Because the proposed research aims
to examine L1 MaltE features which cannot be attributed to transfer or interference phenomena
and to investigate the societal attitudes towards this English variety by L1 English speakers, the
proposed project will focus on individuals from family types C and D.

5.0 Description of Methods
In order to answer the proposed research questions, this project will employ a linguistic
variationist framework and carry out a micro-level analysis of language-in-use in order to
document the structure, variation, and change over time of MaltE across three generations, four
speech styles and two genders. Sociolinguistic interviews, a research standard in variationist
work, will be the primary source of data collection and will be structured in order to meet the
following two goals: a) eliciting casual, unmonitored speech on a range of non-linguistic topics,
b) eliciting speech concerning participants views on language including linguistic awareness of
and language attitudes towards MaltE, language change, and the role of English in Malta. In
order to avoid the influence of language-based questions on the unmonitored speech of
participants, language focused questions will be restricted to the latter half of each interview.
Additionally, with the goal of collecting speech from a range of speech styles, interviews will be
supplemented with a narrative retell task, a reading passage, and a word list task.

5.1 Participants
Participants in the proposed study will be forty-eight individuals from a single region
Sliema, an English dominant community on the northeast of the main islandwho share
homogenous educational backgrounds and socioeconomic statuses: upper middle class
individuals educated in private, English medium schools. Participants will be from three age
groups and both genders and will be individuals who self-identify as high-level English-Maltese
bilinguals, i.e., who report using English or English and Maltese at home from a young age, and
for whom English is the most dominant language. The proposed research is the first to begin to
investigate the nature of the bilingual community in Malta empirically, and thus, necessitates a
restriction of participants to L1 English speakers for two principle reasons: 1) to avoid claims of
interference or incomplete second language acquisition of English which have plagued earlier
research on English varieties in bilingual contexts (Santa Ana 1993; Santa Ana and Bayley 2004)
and 2) to provide a comprehensive description of the range of linguistic choices available in
MaltE, whose previous descriptions are plagued with a lack of systematicity, a reliance on
speaker intuitions and a failure to consider and/or disclose the language background of
informants.
Participants will be selected using the friend of a friend approach standard in
ethnographic sociolinguistic work (Milroy 1980). The use of this technique can facilitate access
into the community and lessen the outsider status of the researcher resulting in a more
comfortable interview and use of more unmonitored speech (Tagliamonte 2006). Coupled with
the friend-of-a-friend approach, a stratified sample, widely used in sociolinguistic work, will be
employed (Tagliamonte 2006; 2002). In this study, participants from three age groups and two
genders will be selected with the goal of investigating both gendered features of MaltE and
language change in apparent-time. Held constant will be participants family language
background, region/hometown, and educational level.

5.2 Data
The primary source of data, forty-eight sociolinguistic interviews, will aim to be
conversational in tone, so as to elicit relatively unmonitored naturalistic MaltE speech data.
While an interview setting is never fully informal, interviewing techniques which have shown to
facilitate a casual interview tone will be used including designing culture-specific, locally
significant questions (Tagliamonte 2006) and open-ended questions which tend to elicit longer
responses (Carspeken 1996). Interviews will first cover a range of non-linguistic topics in order
to capture unmonitored naturalistic MaltE data. The latter half of the interview will contain
language focused questions geared to collecting information about participants family language
background, language use, language attitudes and ideologies, and experiences with language-
based discrimination. Interviews will be audio recorded using an Olympus Digital Voice
Recorder WS-100 and two clip-on, small microphones, one for the researcher, one for the
interviewee.
In addition to sociolinguistic interviews, each participant will fill out a language
background questionnaire, which will be used to triangulate responses about language use and
language attitudes with participants discussion of language in the interviews. To capture the
influence of speech style on the dependent variables, participants will be asked to 1) read a
portion of the Rainbow Passage, a short text representing the sounds of English in most of their
phonological contexts 2) read a wordlist aloud which will contain tokens of the variables under
study here, and 3) watch and orally recount a short film clip from Modern Times, a 1936 Charlie
Chaplin silent film which has been used previously to elicit narratives by the European Science
Foundation in their investigations of second language acquisition (Perdue 1993).
These three supplementary tasks provide a parallel task across all participants; they differ
in the amount of attention paid to ones speech. The word-list task yields the most attention paid
to speech followed by the reading passage and finally, the narrative retell. The narrative task is a
less controlled speech event than the two reading tasks, yet similar to the reading passage, the
narrative retell fosters more unconscious speech than the word list where the requirement of
maintaining coherence deflects some attention away from speech (Chambers 2003:5-6).
These additional oral speech data will allow a comparison of MaltE variation based on degree of
attention paid to speech, which may reveal underlying attitudes regarding the prestige forms of
language.

5.2.1 Structural Variables
Three structural variables will be extracted from the sociolinguistic interviews and
modeled using the quantitative paradigm (Bayley 2002): realization of postvocalic [r], (lack of)
stopping of interdental fricatives, and lexical stress patterns. Selection of structural variables
follows Labov (1966), who stresses that a variable should be frequent, structured and socially
meaningful, and Santa Ana (1993), who argues for the need to examine linguistic variables
which have been studied in other language contact settings to facilitate our understanding of the
processes at work in contact settings and in the formation of new language varieties.
According to Vella, MaltE is a rhotic variety, with postvocalic-[r] realized as a
palatalized liquid (1995). Mazzon provides the only other description of MaltE [r]: MaltE [r] is
realized as a flap. In these descriptions no discussion of variation in the English of Maltese
individuals is present. Post-vocalic [r] deletion is well-attested in sociolinguistics, both in the
United States (Labov 1966) and in the United Kingdom (Trudgill 2004; Trudgill and Hannah
1994). While [r] deletion is generally viewed as non-standard and stigmatized in dialects of
American English (Labov 1966), [r] deletion in the United Kingdom is associated with RP, the
standard and prestigious variety (Trudgill and Hannah 1994). Thus, the selection of this variable
is governed by the aim to investigate the prestige form in MaltE. Are MaltE speakers aspiring to
a foreign RP pronunciation or are new norms of acceptability and prestige emerging?
Scholars agree that the replacement of interdental fricatives with stops is a feature of
MaltE ((Camilleri 1991; Mazzon 1993; Vella 1995), and that stops are aspirated in all positions
in MaltE (Vella 1995). Yet, as no variationist studies of English in Malta have been conducted,
the linguistic factors conditioning this variable as well as its potential social meanings and uses
have yet to be examined. Additionally, because of the prevalence of stopping of interdental
fricatives across varieties of English, the selection of this variable will allow a comparison of our
findings to other English varieties, especially post-colonial and European varieties of English, as
called for by Santa Ana (1993).
Lexical stress variation is another common characteristic of varieties of English, yet one
which has not been examined by many researchers. Vella concludes that a preference for
penultimate stress and a disfavoring of stress before the antepenultimate syllable occurs in MaltE
(1995). Examining lexical stress variation in MaltE will further our sparse understanding of
variation in suprasegmental features in both its social and linguistic factors. Similar to the two
linguistic variables listed above, analyzing lexical stress variation will allow us to determine
whether MaltE speakers are following the path of other postcolonial varieties and developing
new norms of correctness and prestige or whether an affinity to the foreign standard of the
former colonizers is being maintained.

5.2.2 Attitudes/Ideologies
Although English-Maltese bilingualism is widespread in Malta, the levels of fluency in
both languages are wide-ranging. As a result, tensions between L1 English (and L1 English-
Maltese bilinguals) on the hand and L1 Maltese speakers on the other have been noted through
research utilizing written questionnaires and Likert-scale surveys. Camilleri reported Speakers
of Maltese as L1 stigmatize speakers with Maltese and English or English as their L1 as the latter
are perceived to be snobs (Camilleri, 1992: 19). A more negative characterization of
predominately English-speaking individuals is evident in the label tas-Sliema, non-literally
translated as snobbish and literally meaning from Sliema, an affluent area in Malta associated
with more English spoken and where this proposed research will be conducted. A more recent
language attitudes study found statements to the effect of English being a snobbish or elitist
language to be surprisingly infrequent, which suggests that today, attitudes to MaltE are in flux
and more positive than have been previously reported (Caruana 2006). Our move towards
incorporating qualitative language attitudes data into quantitative variationist analyses is
motivated by these conflicting claims in the Maltese sociolinguistic literature and mirrors a
recent shift in variationist work towards more ethnographic-quantitative linguistics pioneered by
Penny Eckert (see [Eckert 2000]). We will aim to quantitatively model the language attitudes
data, collected in the latter half of the sociolinguistic interviews, in order to investigate
correlations between speakers attitudes and features of their MaltE speech across style. Do
those who report favorable attitudes towards English, for example, draw upon more RP features
in their speech?

5.3 Analysis
The analysis will be largely quantitative, with qualitative analysis undertaken for the
coding of language attitudes data. VARBRUL, a specialized application of logistic regression
and the most widely used multivariate analysis software in variationist research will be
employed. Because of the naturalistic data used in variationist analysis as well as the multiple
independent variables which favor/disfavor the choice of a particular linguistic variant,
traditionalist statistical methods do not suffice (Bayley 2002; Tagliamonte 2006). VARBRUL
easily handles both the Principle of Quantitative Modeling and the Principle of Multiple Causes
important to variationist research (Young and Bayley 1996). These principles allow for an
examination of the forms that a linguistic variable takes, andwhat features of the context co-
occur with these forms and suggest it is unlikely that any single contextual factor can explain
the variability observed in natural language data (Bayley 2002:118).
The process of analysis will begin with transcription of the sociolinguistic interviews. If
selected for funding, we will hire local, native MaltE speakers to transcribe the data so as to
capture features of MaltE that might be overlooked by non-native transcribers as well as to allow
for codeswitching to Maltese to be easily included in the transcriptions. Transcription reliability
checks will be performed and a 95% agreement rate across transcribers will be sought.
Language attitudes data will then be coded qualitatively using the program Atlas TI, a highly
useful tool common in qualitative research. Following, the structural data will be coded for
linguistic, social, and stylistic factors which may be conditioning the variation in the realization
of the two segmental variables and one suprasegmental variable under study. Linguistic factors
will vary across variables and acoustic analyses will be used to verify coding of variant; social
factors coded will be age, gender, language attitudes, and any additional locally salient social
variables that emerge, while stylistic independent variables will be the four different speech
types detailed above.

6.0 Researcher Competence
Because of her extensive familiarity and living experiences in Malta, her high level of
Maltese and MaltE fluency, and her large Maltese social network, Co-PI Bonnici is in an optimal
position to carry out the proposed project. Bonnici, a Maltese-American born in Malta to two
Maltese parents, immigrated with her family to the U.S. at a young age. As a result, she is
intimately familiar with the Maltese language and culture and maintains an impressive social
network of over one hundred family members and friends throughout the islands. She has lived
in Malta for three months at a time seven times in her life and has made multiple shorter visits to
the islands as well.
Furthermore, her extensive research experience and training in a) ethnographic,
sociolinguistic field methods under UC Davis Anthropologist Karen Watson-Gegeo, b)
quantitative, variationist methods under UC Davis Professor, Advisor and PI of this project, Dr.
Robert Bayley, and c) acoustic phonetics under UC Davis Professor, Orhan Orgun, have amply
prepared her for carrying out the data collection and analysis for the proposed project. This
project does not mark the first step of Bonnici into Maltese sociolinguistic research. In her first
project, she conducted sociolinguistic interviews with Maltese youth and examined their patterns
of language use and ideologies towards Maltese and English (Bonnici 2006). Under Watson-
Gegeo, she conducted life history interviews with elderly Maltese-American immigrant women
(Bonnici 2007b). Additionally, Bonnici has conducted a number of quantitative research
projects including: a variationist analysis of non-traditional like and a project on listeners
attitudes and sensitivity to distinct functions of non-traditional like (Bonnici 2007a).
PI Bayley will be readily available to Bonnici for guidance and mentorship support
throughout the entirety of the proposed project, from the preparation stage until the final
dissemination stage. Bonnici also has had the support and guidance of two additional UC Davis
faculty whose work is aligned with her own: Lenora Timm, Professor of Linguistics, whose
work focuses on bilingualism and lesser spoken languages in Europe and Janet Shibamoto-Smith
Linguistic Anthropologist who mentored Bonnici in the preparation of the proposed research and
will continue to be a rich resource and mentor throughout the proposed project.
As a founding member of the newly formed International Society of Maltese Linguistics,
Bonnici has gained access and fostered relationships with Maltese linguists in Malta and abroad,
most notably Alexandra Vella, Researcher at the Institute of Linguistics at the University of
Malta, Antoinette Camilleri-Grima, Sociolinguist in the Department of Education at the
University of Malta, and Thomas Stolz, Founder of the Maltese Linguistics society and Professor
of Linguistics at the University of Bremen, Germany. These scholars will be available to
Bonnici throughout the project, especially during the field work/data collection stage. This work
builds upon the existing sociolinguistic work in Malta with a move for introducing quantitative
variationist methods to the existing qualitative work which has characterized Maltese
sociolinguistics thus far.

7.0 Expected Outcomes
The socio-political circumstances of the spread of English in Malta suggest two
possibilities for the structural trajectory of English in Malta: 1) a parallel trajectory as other
postcolonial varieties with MaltE emerging as its own rule-governed systematic variety 2) a
maintenance of and affinity to the foreign RP standard. Maltas proximity to the U.K., its
location in Europe, and its cultural and political affinity to Europe renders the situation more
complex than other postcolonial contexts. This project will test empirically the systematicity of
this variety on its own terms, as a variety rooted in a situation of language contact, British
colonialism, and the current sociopolitical atmosphere as a recent E.U. member, and will
investigate if MaltE has emerged as a variety with its own patterns of variation, norms of
appropriateness and correctness, and social meanings.
Contrary to previous descriptions of MaltE, we expect the MaltE of L1 speakers will
reveal itself as a rule-governed systematic variety of English with features found in both Maltese
and RP. We hypothesize that L1 bilingual speakers of MaltE will have access to the full range of
linguistic choices, whereas post-adolescent learners of English might have a more limited set of
MaltE options to draw from. The aspired to norm may still be RP, but this needs to be tested
empirically by looking at the features of more formal situations; if participants speech contains
more standard RP structural features in formal speech, then we can tentatively assume that RP is
still an aspired to norm. If this is the case, then in less formal situations, participants will likely
exhibit more local features.
We expect some American English features might emerge, given the predominance of
American English popular culture in Malta/Europe and participants accommodation to the
researcher, a Maltese-American. Across the age span, we hypothesize that MaltE is becoming
less like RP as younger speakers are learning English from MaltE teachers rather than British
English teachers. We suppose that a V-shaped pattern may emerge, akin to Dubois and
Hovarths work on Cajun English (1998), with older and younger speakers patterning similarly
and using more local, MaltE features, whereas middle aged speakers may have more RP-like
patterns. We hypothesize that there will be gender differences because of the connection
between Maltese and masculinity and observations that men use more Maltese than women
(Portelli 2006).
Regarding attitudes, we expect some speakers will feel insecure about their MaltE, and
attitudes towards whether British English should be the aspired to norm will likely vary across
the age span with more tolerance for local forms in younger participants. Language attitudes will
correlate with features of their MaltE where those who show affinity to the British norm will
have more RP features in their speech across speech styles, while those who express more
affinity to Maltese or who are aware of MaltE and not insecure about the variety will have more
local features in their MaltE.
In terms of the three variables, we expect all three features will vary since 1) these
features have been shown to vary across varieties of English, 2) the realization of the sounds in
question and the lexical stress patterns differ in Maltese and standard Englishes and 3)
postvocalic [r] and interdental fricatives are highly marked sounds cross linguistically.

8.0 Broader Ramifications/Impacts
Undertaking this research on MaltE will benefit Maltese and American researchers and
linguists interested in postcolonial Englishes, language contact, and bilingual communities.
Malta is a rich, bilingual context yet one of the most understudied linguistic contexts in Europe.
The proposed project will mark the first of many large-scale research projects for Co-PI Bonnici
in this context, who will work to forge long-term international partnerships between U.S.
linguists and the local Maltese linguistics community. After obtaining her Ph.D., Co-PI Bonnici
intends to pursue a position in academia, where she is committed to increasing dialogue and
collaboration with both Maltese linguists and students of linguistics through collaborative
research projects and international graduate student exchange opportunities for graduate students
in both U.S. universities and the University of Malta.
Additionally, the proposed project will mark the first quantitative study of language
variation in Malta, and Co-PI Bonnici is committed to conducting training in the quantitative
paradigm. In addition to employing and mentoring two Maltese linguistics students in the
transcription phase of the research, thereby augmenting their ability to conduct original research
in the future, Co-PI Bonnici is seeking to organize a colloquium on variationist methods at the
Institute of Linguistics at the University of Malta during her research trip.
A significant impact of the proposed research will be to expand the database on bilingual
speech communities, which, as we know, include most of the world's population. As Romaine
(1995) has argued, the study of bilingualism should be the prime task of modern linguistics. The
proposed project contributes substantially toward this goal.
Finally, Co-PI Bonnici aims to increase local awareness among non-linguists about
nonstandard varieties of English and the validity and systematicity of MaltE by submitting an
editorial for publication in The Sunday Times, the most widely read Maltese newspaper and a
place where language-based discussions have taken place in the past.

9.0 Research Schedule
The timeline for the proposed project includes the period January 2008 to June 2009,
divided into the following stages: preparation, data collection, data analysis, write-up, and
dissemination of results. Each phase is detailed below.

2008 2009
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6
Preparation
Data Collection
Data Analysis
Write-up
Dissemination

9.1 Preparation
The preparation phase, from January 2008 to April 2008, will begin before the proposed
grant period. During this phase, interviews will be designed and trial interviews will be
conducted with Maltese American immigrants in the San Francisco Bay Area. Contact with
proposed participants by means of Co-PI Bonnicis existing networks in Malta will begin and
first interviews will be scheduled. Review of the research by the Institutional Review Board at
UC Davis will be completed.

9.2 Data Collection
The data collection period, April 2008 to August 2008, roughly corresponds with the
Spring and Summer quarters at UC Davis. During this period, all sociolinguistic interviews will
be conducted. NSF grant support would allow Co-PI Bonnici to be absent from teaching and
research-based income and responsibilities at UC Davis.

9.3 Analysis
The data analysis period, July 2008 until November 2008, will begin with interview
transcription and coding of all data. By beginning the transcription period while still in Malta,
the Co-PI, with NSF support, will be able to call upon local native MaltE speakers to transcribe
and code the data, thus involving the local community into the project and relying on native
MaltE speakers judgments and observations on the language data thereby alerting the researcher
to structural phenomena that might otherwise go unnoted. Following transcription and coding, a
multivariate analysis of the linguistic data will be conducted at UC Davis and findings will begin
to be identified.

9.4 Write-up
The dissertation project write-up period will take place between November 2008 and
April 2009, which will allow Co-PI to present her findings at the Second International
Conference on Maltese Linguistics to be held in Bremen, Germany. Co-PI Bonnici was an
invited speaker at the first Maltese Linguistics conference in October 2007 where she presented
this proposed project to an international audience of Maltese linguists.

9.5 Dissemination of results
Co-PI Bonnici intends to present her results at the following national and international
conferences: New Ways of Analyzing Variation (October 2008), the premier sociolinguistics
conference in the U.S., the Annual Meeting of the Linguistics Society of America (LSA) in
January 2009, and the Maltese Linguistics conference in April 2009. Co-PI Bonnici intends to
seek publications of her work in renowned sociolinguistics journals and will present her work in
her departmental colloquia series and in job interview presentations during this period. Co-PI
Bonnici seeks NSF support for one of these dissemination conferencesLSA.
References

Bayley, Robert. 2002. "The Quantitative Paradigm." In The Handbook of Language Variation
and Change, ed. J.K. Chambers, Peter Trudgill and Natalie Schilling-Estes, 117-41.
Malden, MA: Blackwell.
. 1999. "Relativization Strategies in Mexican-American English." American Speech 74:
115-39.
Berdichevsky, Norman. 2004. ations, Language, and Citizenship. Jefferson, North Carolina:
MacFarland.
Bonnici, Lisa. "The Discourse of Evaluation: Linguistic and Pragmatic Sources of Evaluation in
the Oral Histories of Two Maltese American Immigrant Women." Paper presented at the
American Association of Applied Linguistics, Costa Mesa, CA 2007b.
. "I Think Its Important to Speak Both: An Examination of Language Practices and
Attitudes in Malta." In Georgetown University Round Table (GURT) on Languages and
Linguistics. Washington, D.C., 2006.
. "Listener Sensitivity to Function: The Case of Two Likes." Paper presented at the New
Ways of Analyzing Variation, Philadelphia, PA 2007a.
Camilleri-Grima, Antoinette. "Diglossia: Variation on a Theme." Paper presented at the
Lingwistika Maltija Conference, Bremen, Germany, October 18-20, 2007.
. 2000. "The Maltese Bilingual Classroom: A Microcosm of Local Society."
Mediterranean Journal of Educational Studies 6: 3-12.
Camilleri, Antoinette. 1995. Bilingualism in Education: The Maltese Experience. Heidelberg:
Julius Groos Verlag.
. 1991. "Crosslinguistic Influence in a Bilingual Classroom: The Example of Maltese and
English." Edinburgh Working Papers in Applied Linguistics 2: 101-11.
. 1992. "The Sociolinguistic Status of English in Malta." Edinburgh Working Papers in
Applied Linguistics 3: 4-24.
Canagarajah, Suresh. 1999. Resisting Linguistic Imperialism in English Teaching. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Carspeken, Phil Francis. 1996. Critical Ethnography in Educational Research: A Theoretical
and Practical Guide. New York, NY: Routledge.
Caruana, Sandro. 2006. "Trilingualism in Malta: Maltese, English and Italiano Televisivo."
International Journal of Multilingualism 3: 159-72.
Cassar, Carmel 2001. "Malta: Language, Literacy, and Identity in a Mediterranean Island
Society." ational Identities 3: 257-75.
Chambers, J.K. 2003. Sociolinguistic Theory. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Crystal, David. 2003. English as a Global Language. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Eckert, Penelope. 2000. Linguistic Variation as Social Practice. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Fishman, Joshua. 1967. "Bilingualism with and without Diglossia; Diglossia with and without
Bilingualism." The Journal of Social Issues 23.
Gumperz, John. 1968. "The Speech Community." In International Encyclopedia of the Social
Sciences, 381-86. New York: Macmillan.
Hymes, Dell. 1986. "Models of the Interaction of Language and Social Life." In Directions in
Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication, ed. John Gumperz and Dell
Hymes, 35-71. New York & Oxford: Blackwell.
Irvine, Judith T., and Susan Gal. 2000. "Language Ideology and Linguistic Differentiation." In
Regimes of Language: Ideologies, Polities, and Identities, ed. Paul V. Kroskrity, 35-83.
Sante Fe: School of American Research Press.
Kachru, Braj. 1986. The Alchemy of English. Oxford: Pergamon.
. 1985. "Institutionalized Second-Language Varieties." In The English Language Today,
ed. Sidney Greenbaum, 211-26. Oxford: Pergamon.
Krishnaswamy, N., and Archana S. Burde. 1998. The Politics of Indians' English. Linguistic
Colonialism and the Expanding English Empire. Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Labov, William. 1966. The Social Stratification of English in ew York City. Arlington, VA:
Center for Applied Linguistics.
. 1972. Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Lave, Jean, and Etienne Wenger. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mair, Christian, ed. The Politics of English as a World Language: ew Horizons in Postcolonial
Cultural Studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2003.
Mazzon, Gabriella. 1993. "English in Malta." English World-Wide 14: 171-208.
Mendoza-Denton, Norma. "Chicana/Mexicana Identity and Linguistic Variation: An
Ethnographic and Sociolinguistic Study of Gang Affiliation in an Urban High School."
Ph.D Dissertation, Stanford University, 1997.
Micheli, Silvia M. 2001. "Language Attitudes of the Young Generation in Malta " Vienna
English Working Papers 10: 30-53.
Mifsud, Manwel. 1995. Loan Verbs in Maltese: A Descriptive and Comparative Study. Leiden:
E.J. Brill.
Milroy, Lesley. 1980. Language and Social etworks. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
Patrick, Peter L. 2004. "The Speech Community." In The Handbook of Language Variation and
Change, ed. J.K. Chambers, Peter Trudgill and Natalie Schilling-Estes, 573-98. Oxford:
Blackwell.
Perdue, Clive, ed. Adult Language Acquisition: Cross-Linguistic Perspectives. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Portelli, John R. 2006. "Language: An Important Signifier of Masculinity in a Bilingual
Context." Gender and Education 18: 413-30.
Romaine, Suzanne. 1995. Bilingualism 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.
Santa Ana, Otto A. 1993. "Chicano English and the Nature of the Chicano Language Setting."
Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 15: 3-35.
Santa Ana, Otto, and Robert Bayley. 2004. "Chicano English: Phonology " In A Handbook of
Varieties of English, ed. Bernd & Edgar W. Schneider Kortmann, 417-34. New York:
Mouton de Gruyter.
Sawyer, Janet. 1970. "Spanish-English Bilingualism in San Antonio, Texas." In Texas Studies in
Bilingualism, ed. Glenn Gilbert, 18-41. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Schilling-Estes, Natalie. 2002. "Investigating Stylistic Variation." In The Handbook of Language
Variation and Change, ed. J.K. Chambers, Peter Trudgill and Natalie Schilling-Estes.
Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Schneider, Edgar W. 2007. Postcolonial English: Varieties around the World. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Sciriha, Lydia. 2001. "Trilingualism in Malta: Social and Educational Perspectives."
International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 4: 23-37.
Tagliamonte, Sali A. 2006. Analysing Sociolinguistic Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
. 2002. "Comparative Sociolinguistics." In The Handbook of Language Variation and
Change, ed. J.K. Chambers, Peter Trudgill and Natalie Schilling-Estes. Malden, MA:
Blackwell.
Trudgill, Peter. 2004. ew Dialect Formation: The Inevitability of Colonial Englishes.
Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Trudgill, Peter, and Jean Hannah. 1994. International English: A Guide to Varieties of Standard
English. 3rd ed. London: Edward Arnold.
Vella, Alexandra. "Prosodic Structure and Intonation in Maltese and Its Influence on Maltese
English." Ph.D dissertation, University of Edinburgh, 1995.
Young, Richard, and Robert Bayley. 1996. "Varbrul Analysis for Second Language Acquisition
Research." In Second Language Acquisition and Linguistic Variation, ed. Robert Bayley
and Dennis R. Preston, 253-306. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Zentella, Ana Celia. 1997. Growing up Bilingual: Puerto Rican Children in ew York.
Cambridge: Blackwell.
Zhang, Qing. 2005. "A Chinese Yuppie in Beijing: Phonological Variation and the Construction
of a New Professional Identity." Language in Society 34: 431-66.





SUMMARY PROPOSAL BUDGET
FOR SF USE OLY
ORGANIZATION
University of California, Davis
PROPOSAL NO. DURATION
(MONTHS)
Proposed Granted
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR/PROJECT DIRECTOR
Robert J. Bayley
AWARD NO.
A. SENIOR PERSONNEL: PI/PD, Co-PIs, Faculty and Other Senior
Associates
NSF-Funded Funds Funds
List each separately with name and title. (A.7. Show number in Person-months Requested Granted
CA ACA SUM Proposer (If
1. Robert J. Bayley 0

0 0 $ 0.00 $
2. Lisa Bonnici 0

0 0 $ 0.00
3.
4.
5.
6. (0) OTHERS (LIST INDIVIDUALLY ON BUDGET EXPLANATION
PAGE)
0

0 0 $ 0.00
7. (2) TOTAL SENIOR PERSONNEL (1-6) 0

0 0 $ 0.00
B. OTHER PERSONNEL (SHOW NUMBERS IN BRACKETS)
1. (0) POSTDOCTORAL ASSOCIATES 0

0 0 0
2. (0) OTHER PROFESSIONALS (TECHNICIAN, PROGRAMMER,
ETC.)
0

0 0 0
3. (0) GRADUATE STUDENTS 0
4. (0) UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS 0
5. (0) SECRETARIAL - CLERICAL (IF CHARGED DIRECTLY) 0
6. ( ) OTHER 0
TOTAL SALARIES AND WAGES (A + B) 0
C. FRINGE BENEFITS (IF CHARGED AS DIRECT COSTS) 0
TOTAL SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE BENEFITS (A + B + C) 0
D. EQUIPMENT (LIST ITEM AND DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR EACH ITEM EXCEEDING 0



TOTAL EQUIPMENT 0
E. TRAVEL 1. DOMESTIC (INCL. CANADA, MEXICO AND U.S. POSSESSIONS) 525
2. FOREIGN 6,244
F. PARTICIPANT SUPPORT
1. STIPENDS $ 0
2. TRAVEL 0
3.
SUBSISTENCE
0
4. OTHER 0
TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS ( 0 ) TOTAL
PARTICIPANT COSTS
0
G. OTHER DIRECT COSTS
1. MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES 400
2. PUBLICATION/DOCUMENTATION/DISSEMINATION
3. CONSULTANT SERVICES 1,400
4. COMPUTER SERVICES 0
54
5. SUBAWARDS 0
6. OTHER 2,264
TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS 4,064
H. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS (A THROUGH G) 10,833
I. INDIRECT COSTS (F&A) (SPECIFY RATE AND BASE)


TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS (F&A) 0
J. TOTAL DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS (H + I) 10,833
K. RESIDUAL FUNDS (IF FOR FURTHER SUPPORT OF CURRENT PROJECT SEE GPG
II.D.7.j.)
0
L. AMOUNT OF THIS REQUEST (J) OR (J MINUS K) $10,833 $
M. COST SHARING: PROPOSED LEVEL $ AGREED LEVEL IF DIFFERENT: $
PI/PD TYPED NAME AND SIGNATURE* DATE FOR NSF USE ONLY
Robert J. Bayley 12/26/07 INDIRECT COST RATE VERIFICATION
ORG. REP. TYPED NAME & SIGNATURE* DATE Date
Checked
Date of Rate
Sheet
Initials-
ORG

NSF Form 1030 (10/99) Supersedes All Previous Editions *SIGNATURES REQUIRED ONLY FOR REVISED
BUDGET (GPG III.C)

Budget Justification
Doctoral Dissertation Research: Variation in Maltese English
Doctoral Dissertation Research Budget for Field Research in Malta

TRAVEL (LIE E): _ $6769
Funding for two trips are requested, one related to data collection and one for disseminating
results
o Data Collection trip, April August, 2008, SFO, CA to Malta TOTAL $6244
1x Roundtrip Airfare between San Francisco and Malta $1100
San Francisco London on American Airlines $816
London Malta on Air Malta $284
This fare is based on current pricing of advanced booking economy fares with a
four-month stay. Although Air Malta is not a U.S. flag carrier, this itinerary is in
compliance with the Fly America Act as no U.S. flag carrier service is available to
Malta.
RT taxi between Malta airport and Sliema area $50
Taxi service is the most secure way to travel to and from the airport. Bus service
is not available at all hours and will be difficult given the amount of equipment
and personal items required for this extended trip.
Taxis and bus fares $200
Co-PI Bonnici will primarily use the bus service to get to and from interview
appointments. Taxi service will only be used at night when bus services are
unavailable.
Living expenses (April 1 to August 1 = 122 days) $4894
Meals and incidental expenses ($27/day * 122 days) $3294
This amount represents one third of the daily maximum Federal meals and
incidental rates for Malta ($80). Co-PI Bonnici will realize these savings
by cooking for herself in her rented flat.
Lodging (rental of 1 bedroom apartment $400 * 4 months) $1600
Rental rates are based on available apartments found on
http://www.choose.malta.com and http://www.timesof
malta.com/classifieds

o Conference travel TOTAL $525
Roundtrip Airfare between San Francisco and Portland $200
Accommodation (3 nights * $75 per night in a shared room) $225
Meals and incidentals $100
Preliminary findings from the proposed research will be presented at the
Linguistic Society of Americas Annual Meeting in January, 2009 in Portland
Oregon. Approximate travel costs are based on current fares on American
Airlines and discounted shared hotel room rates. The small meals and incidentals
budget will go towards transportation to and from the airport as well as meals.

OTHER DIRECT COSTS (LIE G):________________ $4064
Funds requested below are for direct costs associated with data collection and analysis.
o Materials and Supplies (Line G1) $200
Photocopies, batteries for recording equipment, blank cds for backing up sound files.

o Consultant Services (Line G3) $1400
Funds are requested for two consultants who are native bilingual speakers of both Maltese
and Maltese English and linguistics students at the University of Malta who have been
trained in transcription methods. We anticipate 100 hours of transcription service, which
allots each one hour interview approximately two hours of paid transcription service. The
compensation rate we will use will be $14 per hour. No additional costs, such as travel or
subsistence costs, will be incurred by participants, as Co-PI will deliver and collect all
transcription materials to the participant.
o Participant Compensation (Line G6) $480
We do not anticipate paying participants (48), as this may be considered inappropriate.
Instead, co-PI Bonnici plans to bring a $10 gift for each informant, consisting of Maltese
pastries and small cakes which are considered both reasonable and acceptable gifts.

Funds are requested for portable recording equipment, qualitative transcription software, and a
laptop for portable data collection and analysis (Line G6).
o Dell Inspiron 1520 Laptop $1390
The laptop will be used to store audio recordings of interviews, to conduct narrative retell
data collection task, to analyze data using Atlas TI qualitative coding software and
VARBRUL quantitative analysis software, and to write up the analysis and prepare
presentations for dissemination using Microsoft Office.
o Microsoft Office Home and Students 2007 $66
This software will be used for preparation of all project documents, for write up of the
analysis and for preparation of conference presentations for dissemination. The cost of the
software reported here is reduced by purchasing the software at the same time as the laptop.
o Portable otebook Security Lock $20
This security lock will serve to protect all data when traveling to and from research site and
conferences.
o 3-Prong C6 International otebook Plug Adapter $28
The adaptor will be used for the laptop while at the research site.
o Atlas TI $150
This coding software is necessary for the qualitative analysis portion of this project. The rate
is significantly reduced as it is a student rate.
o Olympus Digital Voice Recorder WS-100 $80
The sound quality of this digital recorder is adequate for the accurate transcription of data
and the quantitative variationist analysis of the phonological variables. It is small and not
intrusive, important for sociolinguistic interviews, and allows up to 27 hours of recording.
o 2 Clip-On Microphones $50
These microphones are small and non-intrusive which is important for sociolinguistic
interviews. They are also noise reducing which is ideal for recording natural speech data
outside of a lab, and are intended for use with Olympus Digital Voice Recorders.

TOTAL DIRECT COSTS (LIE H):________________ ___$10,633

SF Biographical Sketch
Lisa Bonnici

PROFESSIOAL PREPARATIO
University of California, Santa Barbara Sociocultural Linguistics B.A., 2002
University of California, Davis Linguistics M.A., 2007
University of California, Davis Linguistics Ph.D. Candidate

PROFESSIOAL APPOITMETS
Associate-In, University of California, Davis, Department of Linguistics, (2006-present)
Graduate Student Teaching Assistant. UC Davis, Department of Linguistics, (2003-2007)
Lecturer, UC Davis, Department of Linguistics, (2005)
Spanish and ESL Instructor; Lipman Middle School; Brisbane, CA, (2002-2003)

PUBLICATIOS AD PRESETATIOSPROJECT RELATED
2007 Language variation in bilingual Malta. Invited Speaker at Maltese Linguistics/
Lingwistika Maltija Conference, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany.
October 18, 2007.
2007 Listeners' Attitudes and Sensitivity to Function: the case of two LIKEs. Poster
Presentation at New Ways of Analyzing Variation 36 (NWAV 36), University of
Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. October 12, 2007.
2007 The Discourse of Evaluation: Linguistic and Pragmatic Sources of Evaluation in the Oral
Histories of Two Maltese American Immigrant Women. Paper Presentation at the
Annual Conference of the American Association of Applied Linguistics, Costa Mesa,
CA. April 23, 2007.
2006 Language practices and attitudes on the island of Malta. In Proceedings of the
Georgetown Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 2006. Washington, DC.
2006 I think its important to speak both:" Language use in Malta. In Proceedings of the
Hawaii International Conference on Arts and Humanities 2006. Honolulu, HI, 360.

ADDITIOAL SIGIFICAT PUBLICATIOS AD PRESETATIOS
2007 Language and anthropology in the courtroom: The case of the Special Court of Sierra
Leone. Current Anthropology. 48(4).Co-authored L. Bonnici & C. Jurt.
2007 Quantifying language degradation in Alzheimer's disease. Paper Presentation at New
Ways of Analyzing Variation 36 (NWAV 36), University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia,
PA. October 14, 2007. Co-authored V. Chand & L. Bonnici
2007 When talk becomes .doc: Issues in the clinical analysis of Alzheimers speech. Paper
presented at UC Davis Symposium: The Curious Lives of Documents: UC Davis, CA.
March 1, 2007. Co-authored L. Bonnici & V. Chand
2007 Pure change. Summary of Macaulay, Ronald. 2006. Pure grammaticalization: The
development of a teenage intensifier. Current Anthropology. 48(4).
2007 Idea density as a measure of communicative skill in Alzheimers disease. Paper
Presentation at the International Neuropsychological Society Mid-year meeting, Bilbao,
Spain. July 7, 2007. Co Authored: K. Baynes, L. Bonnici, V. Chand & S. Farias.

SYERGISTIC ACTIVITIES
Project Idea Density in Alzheimers Patients. Ongoing work with 70 patients
developing an assessment tool for Alzheimers patients' oral speech which
measures communicative decline and language change over time,
examines the structure and density of information in oral speech and
captures degradation of idea density associated with Alzheimers Disease
for clinical diagnoses. In collaboration with researchers from the UC
Davis Medical Center and the Neuroscience and Linguistics Departments,
UC Davis. 2005-present.
Project JP Harrington Project: Gabrielino, Karok, & Shasta. Documenting and
classifying anthropological linguist, J.P. Harringtons research on
Indigenous California Languages, under M. J. Macri, PI, Native American
Studies Department, UC Davis. 2006-present.
Editorship Editorial Associate for Current Anthropology journal. Duties included
writing and publishing summaries of current linguistic anthropology
articles to be disseminated to the anthropological community; conducting
and publishing interviews with linguistic anthropologists working outside
of academia; nominating books for review. 2006-2007.
Service Linguistics Colloquium Organizer; Organized professional talk series of
invited speakers from universities around the country and globe.
University of California, Davis; 2005-2007.
Service Graduate Student Representative, Department of Linguistics Faculty
Committee. Disseminated information from departmental faculty meetings
to graduate students; reported graduate students issues, ideas and
concerns to the faculty. University of California, Davis 2005-2006

RECET COLLABORATORS

R. Bayley, Linguistics Department, UC Davis; K. Baynes, Neuroscience Department, UC Davis;
V. Chand, Linguistics Department, UC Davis; S. Farias, Department of Neurology, UC Davis
Medical Center; T. Stolz, Institute for General and Applied Linguistics, University of Bremen

Graduate Advisor
Dr. Robert Bayley, University of California, Davis

SF Biographical Sketch
Principal Investigator: ROBERT BAYLEY

A. PROFESSIOAL PREPARATIO
Columbia University Comparative Literature B.S. 1967
University of California, Berkeley Comparative Literature M.A. 1969
Stanford University Language, Literacy, and Culture Ph.D. 1991

B. APPOITMETS
Professor, University of California, Davis, Department of Linguistics (2006-present).
Professor, University of Texas, San Antonio, Division of Bicultural-Bilingual Studies (1991-
2006). Tenure awarded, 4/97; promoted to Professor, 4/01.
Fulbright-York Visiting Chair in Linguistics, York University, Toronto (Sept.-Dec. 2003).
Fulbright Senior Lecturer in Applied Linguistics/TEFL, Autonomous University of Nuevo Len,
Monterrey, Mexico (Jan.-June, 1994).
Teaching Fellow, English for Foreign Students Program, Stanford University (1988-91).
Fulbright Senior Lecturer, Department of Languages and Linguistics, San Simon University,
Cochabamba, Bolivia (June-Sept., 1988).
Lecturer, Department of Communication Studies, San Jos State University (1987-88).
Fulbright Senior Lecturer in TEFL, Binational Centers of Cochabamba, La Paz, and Santa Cruz,
Bolivia (June-Sept., 1987).
Instructor, American Language Program, California State University, Hayward (1986-87).
Language Teaching Specialist, Department of English, Beijing Institute of Foreign Languages,
China (1985-86).
Language Teaching Specialist, Department of Foreign Languages, Harbin Institute of
Technology, Harbin, China (1984-85).
Instructor, Humanities Division (English, ESL, Latin), Merritt College, Oakland, CA (1974-84).

C. PUBLICATIOSPROJECT RELATED
2007 Sociolinguistic Variation: Theories, Methods, and Applications. Cambridge:
Cambridge U. Press. Co-edited: R. Bayley & C. Lucas.
2006 Statistical testing of variation. In K. Brown (ed.) The Encyclopedia of Language
and Linguistics, 2nd ed. Oxford: Elsevier. Vol. 12, 132-138.
2003 Languages other than English in Canada and the United States. In D. R. Preston
(ed.), eeded Research in American Dialects. Durham, NC: Duke U. Press. 163-
229. Co-authored: R. Bayley & R. King.
2002 The quantitative paradigm. In J. K. Chambers et al. (eds.), The Handbook of
Language Variation and Change. Oxford: Blackwell. 117-141.
1996 Varbrul analysis for second language acquisition research. In R. Bayley & D. R.
Preston (eds.), Second Language Acquisition and Linguistic Variation. Amsterdam:
John Benjamins. 253-306. Co-authored: R. Young and R. Bayley.


ADDITIOAL SIGIFICAT PUBLICATIOS
2004 Two chapters: Chicano English: Morphology and syntax and Chicano English:
Phonology. In B. Kortmann et al. (eds.), A Handbook of Varieties of English.
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Co-authored: R. Bayley & O. Santa Ana.
2004 The Acquisition of Sociolinguistic Competence. Theme issue of the Journal of
Sociolinguistics 8(3). Co-edited: R. Bayley & V. Regan.
2004 Variation in the group and the individual: Evidence from second language
acquisition. IRAL 42:303-319. Co-authored: R. Bayley & J. Langman.
2002 Language as Cultural Practice: Mexicanos en el norte. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum. Co-authored: S. R. Schecter & R. Bayley.
2002 Phonological variation in American Sign Language: The case of 1 handshape.
Language Variation and Change 14:19-53. Co-authored: R. Bayley, C. Lucas, &
M. Rose.
2000 Variation in American Sign Language: The case of DEAF. Journal of
Sociolinguistics 4:
81-107. Co-authored: R. Bayley, C. Lucas, & M. Rose.
2001 Sociolinguistic Variation in American Sign Language. Washington, DC: Gallaudet
Univ. Press. Co-authored: C. Lucas, R. Bayley, & C. Valli.
1997 Null pronoun variation in Mexican-descent childrens narrative discourse.
Language Variation and Change 9: 349-371. Co-authored: R. Bayley & L. Pease-
Alvarez.

D. SYERGISTIC ACTIVITIES
Project The History and Structure of Black ASL in the South (Ceil Lucas, P.I., Robert
Bayley & Carolyn McCaskill, co-P.I.s),, funding by the Spencer Foundation (May
2007-May 2008). Data collection in progress in five southern sites.

Project Sociolinguistic Variation in ASL: Materials for Building Community Awareness
(Ceil Lucas, P.I., Robert Bayley & Clayton Valli, co-P.I.s), funding by NSF (June
2001-Aug 2004). Duties included writing and editing materials based on previous
research for members of the U.S. Deaf community and the lay public. Results
published as the book and accompanying video, Whats Your Sign for PIZZA? An
Introduction to Variation in ASL (with C. Lucas & C. Valli, Gallaudet Univ. Press,
2003).

Project Sociolinguistic Variation in ASL, phase 2 (Ceil Lucas, P.I.), funded by NSF (June
1997-June 2000). Duties included data analysis and dissemination of findings.
Findings published in American Speech, the Journal of Sociolinguistics, Language
Variation and Change, Sign Language Studies and several edited volumes, as well
as in the book, Sociolinguistic Variation in American Sign Language (Gallaudet
Univ. Press, 2001).

Project Family Language Use, Bilingual Development, and Adaptation to Schooling in
Two Mexican-Origin Communities, funded by the National Academy of Education
(Sept. 1997-June 1999). Duties included data analysis and dissemination of
findings. Findings published as Language as Cultural Practice: Mexicanos en el
norte (Erlbaum, 2002).

Project Family Language Environment and Bilingual Development: Toward an Integrated
Maintence Model (with Sandra Schecter), a 2 year project funded by the Spencer
Foundation and the US Department of Education (Sept. 1994-Aug. 1996). Duties
included data collection, analysis, dissemination of findings, and administration of
Texas site; findings published in Bilingual Research Journal, Linguistics and
Education, TESOL Quarterly, and several edited volumes.

E. RECET DOCTORAL DISSERTATIOS SUPERVISED (all at U of Texas, San
Antonio):
2007 Xiaoshi Li, "The acquisition of sociolinguistic competence in Chinese as a second
language: A variationist perspective."
2006 Li Jia, "The invisible and the visible: Language socialization in a Chinese heritage
language schoo."
2006 Belinda Trevio Schouten, "Working the system: Low income Latino student
achievement.
2006 Xingsong Shi, Cultivating cross-cultural communicative competence through
second language socialization.

F. COLLABORATORS: Co-authors listed above and Gregory Guy (NYU), Dennis Preston
(Michigan State), and John Rickford (Stanford).

Chancellors Teaching Fellowship: Paul McPherron
Personal Statement
I am currently working toward a Ph.D in Linguistics at UC Davis in the same program
where I received a Masters degree in Linguistics in 2004. In addition, I also work as the
Teaching Assistant Consultant Coordinator (TACC) at the Teaching Resources Center (TRC). In
this role, I supervise eight consultants who videotape teaching assistants and lead workshops
related to issues in college teaching. My graduate work has always focused on applied
linguistics with a focus on English Language Teaching (ELT). My masters thesis was entitled
Assumptions in assessment: the role of the teacher in evaluating ESL students and examined
some common assumptions that teachers make of students in ESL classrooms. My interests in
TESOL and applied linguistics come primarily from numerous teaching positions in the United
States and abroad. Most recently, I taught English and composition at Shantou University in
southern China from 2004-2005.
The class that I am proposing to co-teach, Introduction to Applied Linguistics, fits both
my teaching and research interests. The class is designed to provide an introduction to
language issues and problems in society to undergraduates by covering topics such as language
and politics, language taboos, language and sexism, and non-standard dialects of English.
Throughout the course, students are encouraged to apply their previous knowledge of linguistic
principles such as semantics, discourse analysis, and lexical categories to issues in society. As it
is the only undergraduate course that focuses solely on applying linguistic theories and
knowledge to society, it is a popular class with undergraduates majoring in linguistics,
communication, or other language-related fields.
As the discipline of applied linguistics can bring together ideas and concepts from many
diverse fields, the challenge of teaching an introductory course is finding the right balance
between exploring some subjects in depth without leaving out important concepts. Second
Language Acquisition (SLA) is one topic that students in past quarters have been very interested
in exploring more in this course. Because I have a strong background as an ESL teacher and
have already completed a masters degree in applied linguistics, Professor Vaidehi Ramanathan
and I feel that we could work well together to add an SLA aspect to the course. In particular, we
would like to focus on how globalization affects language learning throughout the world. Many
of the undergraduate students in the class have an interest in teaching English abroad after
finishing at Davis, and we would like to provide them with an introduction to the politics and
policies of SLA around the world. Additionally, I will be presenting at a conference this spring in
China about how globalization is changing language learning in China, and I plan to use some of
my current research on this topic if I am able to co-teach this course.
On a personal note, Professor Ramanathan and I feel that our collaboration in teaching
this class would provide a great experience for me as I prepare to look for future teaching
positions in higher education. I know that we will work well together as I have taken many
classes with her and she supervised my masters thesis. After finishing my Ph.D., I hope to find a
position at a university either in the U.S. or abroad where I can split my time between teaching
and research. I would particularly like to teach future teachers of ESL who are enrolled in
undergraduate or masters programs. I feel that the experience of teaching the applied
linguistics course through the Chancellors Teaching Fellowship would provide a great
experience and a useful qualification toward that goal.

Teaching Plan for LIN 165- Introduction to Applied Linguistics
Prof. Vai Ramanathan and Paul McPherron
Introduction to Applied Linguistics is a regularly scheduled upper-division linguistics course
taught by Prof. Ramanathan during winter quarters. The course fulfills a G.E. requirement and is the only
undergraduate class focused entirely on applied topics and research. The course introduces
undergraduate students to language related issues and problems in the world, including language
learning and teaching, language and gender, language and race, and language and class. The goal of the
course is to introduce a sense of how language functions in the social world, and how an analysis of
language can become a tool by which to probe societal concerns. The course encourages students to
question and debate current language policies and ideologies through readers notes and a term project,
in which students collect and analyze data through qualitative and discourse analysis methods
introduced throughout the quarter. Students in both linguistics and related fields such as education,
anthropology, and communications have taken the course in the past. A key component of the course is
creating a space in class discussions and through course assignments in which students develop a critical
awareness of how language (re)produces patterns of inequality, and what steps we can take to
ameliorate disparities, especially given the increasingly diverse world/s we find ourselves operating in.
Professor Ramanathan has taught the course since coming to UC Davis in 2002, and often draws
on current issues in applied linguistics raised in her own research as well as work from her colleagues.
Recent topics have included accent and discrimination and English language teaching in India. Due to the
focus on dialogue and critical thinking, there is a constant need to update the material and find new
ways to induce discussion among students. A fellowship would help by offering Prof. Ramanthan and
Paul McPherron an opportunity to develop new topics for exploration in the class as well as new
avenues to peak student interest and engagement with applied linguistics.

Proposed changes
Focused on the two goals of content enhancement and extended student engagement, we
propose the following changes to the course:
1. Developing a new unit on globalization and English language teaching. Many of the students
taking this class are planning on careers in teaching and education, often teaching English in a foreign
country. Focusing on the multiple local policy and pedagogical aspects of English language teaching is
one aspect of the class that we feel would be a valuable contribution for these future teachers. In
addition to Prof. Ramanathans work on English teaching in India, Mr. McPherron will spend the coming
spring quarter teaching and research in China, and he could use this course as an opportunity to present
some of the data from his ethnography of university English teaching in China. In addition, new reading
about post-methodology from leading ESL scholars will also be included.
2. Creating a Smartsite page for student discussion and engagement. In addition to turning in
readers notes, we would like to have students post comments in the chat room of the Smartsite, as well
as work on class projects together on the wiki page for the Smartsite. Mr. McPherron created a
smartsite when teaching the Seminar on College Teaching during Fall 2006, and in collaboration, we
would use this fellowship to explore further functions on the Smartsite, including posting additional
readings online and creating a wiki in which students work together to create abstracts of their group
projects.
3. Bringing in guest speakers from the community. Each quarter, many linguistics and language
experts come to give talks on campus related to issues raised in the course, but often they are not asked
to speak or meet with undergraduate students. We intend to use some of the money from the $500 to
invite at least two speakers to come to the campus and present their research or work to the students
during the class, possible speakers include directors of ESL programs at community colleges and former
Linguistics students working in language related industries. Since most of the students are upper-
division students, we feel that this opportunity to interact with academics and professionals from other
campuses could extremely useful in helping them consider their future career goals.
4. Requiring students to create abstracts and submit them to an undergraduate research
conference. Each quarter, students present original and interesting research around a language issue of
their choice. As a way to introduce them to the academic research world, we would like to have student
groups write an abstract as part of their final project grade and find possible conferences or avenues to
submit their project. The wiki on the Smartsite could provide an easy way to revise the abstracts and
view other groups projects.

Evaluation of the project
The response of students to a year-end evaluation of the class will give us some insight into how
well these topics were received, and we plan to add questions that specifically target the changes that
we proposed. In addition, we plan to use the resources of the TRC and have teaching consultants
videotape the class early in the quarter as well as perform a mid-quarter interview. Mr. McPherron has
worked as a TAC in the past and has found videotaping and mid-quarter interviews very helpful if done
early enough in the quarter.

Topical outline of course
All materials and lectures will be reviewed and discussed by both instructors prior to each week.
In addition, we will each watch the others lectures to insure continuity between topics. Prof.
Ramanathan will begin teaching the first two weeks, but we will alternate weeks for the rest of the
quarter. The topics and instructor are listed below.

Week 1: Introducing Applied Linguistics- the nature of language; Ramanathan.
Week 2: Good English- standard and non standard dialects; McPherron.
Week 3: Language, gender, and sexism- conversation analysis; Ramanathan.
Week 4: Language, communication, and standards- register analysis; McPherron. Week 5: Language,
mass media, and advertising- written analysis; Ramanathan.
Week 6: Language and terrorism- clause structures and semantics; McPherron
Week 7: Second Language Acquisition- methods and theories; McPherron.
Week 8: Globalization and language education- language policies; McPherron.
Week 9: The language of politics- morphology; Ramanathan.
Week 10: Final thoughts- project presentations; Ramanathan and McPherron.

Collaboration and benefits
We feel that our collaboration in teaching this class would provide a great experience for both
Mr. McPherron as he prepares for future teaching positions in higher education and Prof. Ramanathan
as she continues to incorporate new topics and technology into the class. Not only is this a class that Mr.
McPherron will most likely teach as a professor of Applied Linguistics in the future, but he is also likely to
teach future teachers of ESL and the topics in this class center around educational issues. In addition, we
know that we will work well together as Mr. McPherron has taken many classes with Prof. Ramanathan
and she is supervising his Ph.D. work.


Chancellors Teaching Fellowship: Ann Kelleher
Personal statement

As a graduate student interested in both theory and practice related to multilingual language
development, I plan to pursue a career as a professor of Applied Linguistics. The field of Applied
Linguistics takes as its focus problems and questions concerning language in society. In my own
research, I have examined Mandarin language instruction for home-background speakers (heritage
language learners) who are caught in a paradoxical situation. On the one hand, bilingualism is held up
as a valuable resource for participation in an increasingly global society and economy. On the other
hand, bilingualism in the U.S. has been vilified as an impediment to full participation in American society
and a detriment to education. In the educational arena, heritage language learners rarely receive
education in their home language. Such students can benefit a great deal from formal education, yet
their presence in foreign language classes is often viewed as illegitimate. Studying the complexity of this
situation fuels my desire to pursue a career that will allow me to accomplish three complementary
tasks: through research, contribute to the store of basic knowledge about socially-contextualized
language development; through teaching, encourage students to think critically about how language
beliefs and practices impact peoples lives; and through service, apply insights about the role language
plays in educational opportunity to real-world matters. While I have been preparing myself for such a
career, finding professional development opportunities that will make me a strong candidate on the
faculty job market, the Chancellors Teaching Fellowship offers an opportunity that I would not
otherwise haveto teach a course directly related to my area of specialization.
I have had an opportunity to gain experience in teaching through my graduate program, specifically in
ESL and structural linguistics. As an M.A. student in the applied track of the Linguistics program, I took a
year-long series of courses for professional development in language teaching. Along with classes on
language teaching pedagogy, pedagogical grammar and the socio-politics of language teaching, I taught
ESL classes each quarter as part of a teaching practicum. This required detailed preparation and
reflection, and was a sound grounding in the theory and practice of teaching. I applied this knowledge to
additional teaching assignments, both as a T.A. and as an instructor. I believe my teaching record is
evidence of my accomplishments. Not only have I been a T.A. for LIN 1, the departments introductory
course, I have been selected to T.A. for both of the upper division foundation courses for the major (LIN
103a and 103b) and LIN 163, another upper division course. Further, I was selected to teach a special
quarter-long training seminar for new LIN 1 T.A.s, funded through the Teaching Resources Center. I
collaborated with a professor to put together the syllabus and select topics, but was solely responsible
for teaching the course. I was also selected to teach my own LIN 1 class during Summer Session, a
competitive position for graduate students in the program.
While these were all valuable professional development experiences for me, I have not had an
opportunity to teach a course that would be of the type I expect to offer in my own area of expertise.
The undergraduate major in Linguistics emphasizes coursework in the core structural areas and does not
have a strong applied focus. The course I am proposing to co-teach for the CTF is one of a very few
undergraduate courses in the area of Applied Linguistics. I anticipate that co-teaching this course will
offer me an opportunity to review recent textbooks, select topics and related readings appropriate for
an introductory course, gain experience lecturing on this material and design classroom activities and
assignments to engage students interest. I take seriously the need to make learning a collaborative
experience for students, but from my own teaching, I know how difficult it can be to find ways to entice
students to engage. Prof. Ramanathan is the ideal faculty member for me to work with in this regard.
She is someone whose career is dedicated to the study of language and education, and whose own
teaching style is highly engaging. Working with her, not only will I learn directly from our collaboration,
but our plan also includes professional development before the course starts, familiarizing myself with
SmartSite and planning ways to use it to promote student discussion. Incorporating technology in the
classroom is increasingly becoming an expectation, but like any other tool, its effective use must be
learned. Co-teaching LIN 165 will give me a unique opportunity to merge content related to language
ideologies, policies and education with classroom technology, starting the process of building a
repertoire of course materials for future use.

Teaching plan

The plan my collaborating professor, Prof. Vaidehi Ramanathan, and I outline below is intended to
take advantage of the Chancellors Teaching Fellowship (CTF) as both a professional development
opportunity for me as an aspiring faculty member, and to expand the types of participation
opportunities students have when taking LIN 165. First, this will be an opportunity for me to gain
experience designing and teaching an introductory course in Applied Linguistics. Specifically I will review,
select and incorporate materials related to my own research into the class syllabus, teach units that
focus on both general information in the field and more topically-focused content from my area of
specialization, evaluate student work and the success of the project overall. Second, we will transform
some of the participation practices of the class to incorporate technologically-mediated student
discussions using SmartSite.
LIN 165, Introduction to Applied Linguistics, is a four-unit lecture/discussion course offered annually
in Spring Quarter and taught by Prof. Ramanathan. Applied Linguistics is a broad field encompassing
topics as diverse as language teaching; second language development; language and gender, race, and
class; language and the media; language policies; and language ideologies. In the past, the specific topics
covered in the course have been selected by Prof. Ramanathan and adapted to the interests of her
students. We plan to collaboratively build on the general structure and content of the course, designing
the syllabus to include new topics related to my own areas of research (multilingualism, education and
language policies), while planning for some flexibility once the class begins, incorporating materials that
address the interests of the enrolled students. We plan to select all of the topics collaboratively, carrying
forward areas that are central to the field (e.g. language education) and those that have been popular
with students in the past (e.g. language and the media). Prof. Ramanathan is my major professor and we
meet on a weekly basis. Beginning in the fall, we plan to use part of the time in our meetings to discuss
the new topics and readings I am considering incorporating and how we will modify the syllabus to
balance new and existing course content. In designing the syllabus, we will also revise the grading
structure, discuss rubrics for evaluating student writing, and will share the responsibility for evaluating
students work.
LIN 165 offers an important complement to the other Linguistics undergraduate course offerings.
Unlike the majority of the departments undergraduate courses that focus on the core structural areas
of linguistics analysis, LIN 165 addresses social matters of concern involving language, something all
students have experienced first-hand. However, for most people, the way language is related to social
organization, particularly relations of power and opportunity, are taken for granted and rendered
invisible. Ideally this class moves students toward an awareness of how language impacts individuals,
structures social systems and can be used as a tool for social change. As Prof. Ramanathan teaches the
course, LIN 165 requires that students connect their own experiences of language development and use
with the ideas presented in class readings. One of the main advantages I will have in working with her
will be observing how she guides students to engage with the course materials, weaving together
individual, out-of-class assignments and in-class activities. As a student in graduate courses with Prof.
Ramanathan, I have benefited from her teaching approach. Our collaborative teaching of LIN 165 will be
an opportunity for me to engage in similar teaching practices and receive regular feedback and
suggestions. We plan to design the syllabus so that we alternate our teaching by topical unit. This will
give me an opportunity to iteratively incorporate her feedback, as well as feedback from the students,
into each of my successive units. Also, during the cycles of the class when Prof. Ramanathan is taking the
lead, I will still be involved in daily classroom activities, participating as needed in small-group
discussions and other classroom activities.
Prof. Ramanathans teaching style is highly interactive, and students participate in and lead
discussions throughout the quarter. We plan to introduce a new element to class discussion,
incorporating some of the functions of SmartSite into the class structure. We believe that using a
discussion board will increase student engagement, giving students an additional opportunity to relate
personal experiences and perspectives to the course materials. Adding a new medium for discussion will
accommodate a wider range of individual learning styles, and take advantage of a type of
communication with which students are familiar and comfortable. Currently, 30 minutes of each class
meeting is set aside for consultation with the professor. We have discussed finding ways to change the
use of this time to support SmartSite-mediated discussions of course material. Early in the quarter this
will involve familiarizing the students with the site itself. Later, the time will be used to discuss some of
the issues coming up through the on-line discussion, and receive feedback on the usefulness of the
activity itself. I will take the lead in designing the incorporation of this activity into the syllabus. First, I
will attend additional workshops on the use of SmartSite in Winter and Spring Quarters, 2008 (I have
taken a basic class already), focused on using the site for class discussions. Then I will propose a specific
plan for fully incorporating this activity into the course, including writing up a specific set of expectations
for the students and determining how their contributions and participation will be incorporated into the
grading structure. We will discuss the proposal and revise the syllabus accordingly during Fall Quarter,
2008.
Evaluation of our project will happen on an on-going basis throughout the quarter, through student
performance and feedback on course content, activities, and teaching. We will take advantage of the
TRCs services to do a mid-quarter student evaluation of the course as a whole and a teaching evaluation
for me. Both types of information will help us determine what is working well and what we might
change to improve the class. In our weekly meetings, we will discuss the quality of student participation
and performance on assignments and the mid-term. At the end of the quarter, we will review the
student course evaluations together as a final measure in evaluating the effectiveness of the class.
For the past two year, I have served as the graduate student representative to the Outstanding
Graduate Student Teaching Award Committee, sponsored by the Graduate Council, the Office of
Graduate Studies, and the Teaching Resources Center. Through this experience I know that Ive been
fortunate to have supportive mentoring of my teaching through my M.A. program. However, I am also
aware that, as a Ph.D. student, I stand to benefit a great deal by teaching in my own area of
specialization in close collaboration with an experienced professor. The Chancellors Teaching
Fellowship offers a unique mentoring opportunity that I hope I will be able to take advantage of in my
final year as a Ph.D. student.

UC Washington Program, Graduate Summer Fellowship: Ann Kelleher

Proposal, 2006
I am currently a linguistics Ph.D. student in my third year of graduate study at U.C. Davis. I entered the
department as an M.A. student in the fall of 2003 and changed my degree objective one year ago. I am in the
process of completing my M.A. thesisa project that focuses on university-level Chinese language teaching.
For this project, I am using qualitative methodologies (critical discourse analysis and ethnography) to examine
the tensions that arise in the classroom setting due to two main constituting factors that are in conflict: 1)
over-arching language teaching ideologies at work in the university setting, and 2) the language development
histories of a majority of the students in the classes; the majority I reference here are students who grow up
with exposure to a variety of Chinese in the home. Students with this kind of language development
background are generally referred to as heritage learners in the Applied Linguistics literature and have
increasingly become the focus of research in recent years. I plan to focus my continuing research within this
general area and the best place for me to gain experience at this point is at the Center for Applied Linguistics
(CAL) in Washington D.C.
As a private, non-profit organization, CAL supports research endeavors and programs on issues related to
language education, policy, literacy, bilingualism, and social and cultural issues surrounding language in the
U.S. Within its Language and Cultural Resources division, there is a particular focus on heritage languages and
heritage language learning. As such, this is one of the few places in the U.S. that supports both academic
inquiry into Second Language Acquisition as well as administering programs intended to support community
and heritage language programs. This is an ideal time to pursue issues about heritage language teaching and
learning, as the federal government is now focused on increasing the number of experts in critical
languages, one of which is Mandarin Chinese. President Bushs January 5, 2006 announcement of a National
Security Language Initiative underscores this focus and a significant part of my interest in going to
Washington, D.C. this summer is to see first-hand how this high-level mandate begins to play out within an
organization with a long-standing commitment to issues of language development.

At this point in my graduate studies, I have a good grounding in the theory and practice of Applied
Linguistics, and I want to work with linguists who are both conducting research and administering programs
as professionals in this field. I have been around the university setting for years as both a student and an
employee, but I think that interning at CAL would give me a broader perspective on alternate career paths
beyond traditional faculty positions. I am very much committed to working in the field of Applied Linguistics
after completing my Ph.D., and would like to continue doing research on questions regarding language and
society. However, I am interested in finding out more about the applied aspects of this kind of researchfor
example, developing and administering language development programs. CAL is an organization that both
supports research and administers programs, and as such, I think it would be a very valuable experience for
me to have first-hand experience working in this kind of setting at this point in my graduate career.

In addition to gaining specific work experience, ideally being involved with an on-going research project,
through this internship I would like to find out more about (at a minimum) 1) how the research enterprise is
conducted at a university-external organization 2) how research and practice are intertwined in a setting like
CAL, and 3) what kind of projects are getting attention and which are not. With my language training,
academic background, and recent research experience, I believe I have the skills and knowledge to work on
projects regarding heritage languages and am hopeful that I would be accepted by CAL to intern with them
this summer. I think it would be a benefit to me in thinking more deeply about the kind of research I will do
as a graduate student for my dissertation, and what kind of career path I might pursue after graduate school.